"Dialogue with Taliban important for peace in Pakistan."
Nawaz Sharif
"Dialogue with Taliban important for peace in Pakistan."
Nawaz Sharif I am no legal luminary, nor am I a wannabe lawyer. I mostly rely on written articles available on the web/newspapers, to understand court judgements.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of India gave its ruling on the appointment of Lokayukta in Gujarat. The popular site DeshGujarat.com has a detailed timeline of this case. Immediately after the verdict, news media was out in full force. The celebrated ‘Blow to Modi’ headline was back!
Let’s take a look at the initial report on NDTV. Here’s a snapshot (courtesy @ sharmarohitraj):
To make it easier, I will zoom into the operative portion of this report:
The image might not be clear, because I had to zoom into this a lot. So I will just paste below the text (emphasis mine):
“Mr. Modi challenged the appointment on the grounds that the Governor has not consulted his cabinet. The Supreme Court disagreed. The judges said that the Governor must seek the advice of the Cabinet to select the Lokayukta, and this was done. ”
Pretty plain English. Easy for any layman to understand. Essentially, according to the report, the Supreme Court was saying that the Gujarat Government had ‘lied’ when it said it had not been consulted. I was wondering why such a simple factual case had to go all the way to the Supreme Court — after all, all correspondence between the Governor and the Cabinet would have been documented well.
Please note — this report was filed moments after the verdict was given. And told us that the Supreme Court said that the Cabinet had beenconsulted.
Guess what! NDTV changed its report by the evening.
Let me present to you a zoomed-in version of the operative part:
“Mr Modi has argued that the Governor did not consult his Cabinet for the appointment. The Supreme Court appeared to agree with that.”
Whoa! In the morning — “The Supreme Court disagreed.” In the evening — “The Supreme Court appeared to agree with that.” First, what does “appeared to agree” even mean? Second, how is this possible that the Supreme Court disagreed in the morning and “appeared to agree” in the evening? The only way this is possible is that NDTV was in a tearing hurry to put up an article without checking facts!
The Supreme Court judgement can be found here. The staff at NDTV must really be some geniuses to have read all 82 pages and filed a report in no time!
It details out the reasons for the delay so far in appointing a Lokayukta. (NDTV merely says: “The post has been lying vacant since 2003.”)
On pages 55 and 56 of this exhaustive 82-page judgement, all three judges agree (and not “appear to agree”) that the Governor has to take the advice of the Council of Ministers. There are other nuances in the judgement which I shall leave for legal experts to explain to all of us.
The limited point I am trying to make here is the media’s overzealousness in reporting anything remotely negative on Narendra Modi. Most NDTV scrolls referred to ‘Governor’ and ‘Modi’. If you don’t believe me, look at NDTV’s headline — “Supreme Court rules against Narendra Modi on Lokayukta, but slams Governor.”
Why not name the Governor if you are naming the Chief Minister? This was a case filed by the Gujarat Government, not by Narendra Modi in his personal capacity. So why is uniformity lacking in media while reporting such stuff?
M Patel
January 3, 2013 at 9:44 pm
Convoluted legal language means Judges can give whatever judgement their heart or prejudice desires. This means judgements can get clouded with post-retirement motives.
In this particular case, Law says Governor should consult State Government but Judges opined that Governor not consulting with State Cabinet is bad but it does not matter because Governor did consult with Chief Justice of Gujarat. Will this set a new precedent that Governor and CJ can get togeather and do what ever they want?
Ajith kumar
January 3, 2013 at 10:07 pm
Even in headlines today,blatant misreporting was dished out,where a reporting journalist stated that the adverse comment made against Mr Modi was not expunged and the anchored woman journalist for her part asked loaded questions using words like tyrant,dictator etc to shankersingh vagela.After eliciting views from some more modi baiter,then return back to reporter,who this time cursoresly said that comment against modi by HC was expunged.But neither journalists considered it necessary to opologise for blatant misreporting.
Bharath
January 3, 2013 at 10:21 pm
Great work bro. Wonderful proofs. what else do we have left to tell about NDTV?!!
manish
January 3, 2013 at 11:54 pm
It is quite an open secret that NDTV is a congress mouthpiece.
So, such a haste in defence of their masters in not totally astonishing.
They have been doing it since long, and will continue to do it for as long as possible.
Arun Kumar
January 4, 2013 at 12:10 am
In the first instance, the judgemant is flawed. If the court is agreed that the Governor must act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers, then how is the appointment of the Lokayukta by the Governor valid? it beats me. Secondly, out of its hatred and bias for Mr Modi, NDTV in particular and CNN-IBN miss the constitutional point. Even the Congress must reflect on this. Today it is Modi, tomorrow the CM may be from their own party and then this judgement will come back to haunt them. The issue is not about individuals, but about institutions. The two judge bench has given a flawed verdict. A special leave petition for a review by a constitutional bench of seven judges needs to go into this as it has implications even for the President of India and the equation with the cabinet.
Sayan Sen
January 4, 2013 at 12:25 am
No surprise, coming from NDTV (the great vanguard of pseudo-secularism & pseudo-liberalism)!I would not have been surprised at all if these media (in bed with the likes of Niira Radia et al) personalities had to tried to find a “Modi-link” to the brutal gangrape in Delhi.Shame on these byte-hungry yellow journailists (as exposed by Jindal sting operation).
neovasant
January 4, 2013 at 3:02 am
Credibility of media is long gone and most of them air their bias. In my view this reflects the lack of bare minimum skills to be in journalism.
Pathak Utpal
January 4, 2013 at 10:58 am
Wow! this is a perfect account of how media chit! a resounding proof of their misgivings! “Blow to Modi” is almost in every media
and we know who has actually given blows to the “Truth”
Bapty.s
January 4, 2013 at 12:33 pm
This. Entire. Matter. Has. A long. And. Full. History. It’s. Shocking. The. Two bench. Judgement. Is. Just shocking. Especially. When. The. Appointment. Of LOKAYUKTA. Has. A long history. In Gujarat. And. Fundamentally. It’s so VERY. OBVIOUS. THAT. THE. GOVERNOR. HAS SHOWN. TOTAL DISREGARD. TO THE. C.M. AND. ASSEMBLY.
IF. ALL THIS CONTINUES TO HAPPEN. WITH CONGRESS. AGENDA. ,HAVING LOST ELECTIONS. IN GUJARAT. FOR THE THIRD CONSECUTIVE TERM. ,TO TRY ALL THESE. BACKDOOR METHODS, WHY. HAVE. ELECTIONS, CONSTITUTION, WHEN. A APPOINTED. GOVERNOR, SOME. COURT RULINGS. CAN BE MADE TO. FAVOUR. WHAT CONGRESS. WANTS.
BJP. CANNOT BE. ON ITS BACKFOOT. ,GULPING ALL THIS NONSENSE. . INTERPRETAION. OF. LAW. CAN’T BE. MADE. TO GO IN FAVOUR. OF. RULING PARTY AT CENTRE. ,JUST BECAUSE. IT HAS THE. RIGHT. TO APPOINT. VARIOUS OFFICES. OF POWER. ,TO SAFEGUARD. IT’S. LAST FEW WICKETS. IN ITS FINAL INNINGS..IT’S SHOCKING. THIS. HAS EXTENDED. DEEP INTO. THE HIGHEST. JUDICIAL. OFFICE. AND. INSTITUTION IN INDIA, A DEMOCRATIC. COUNTRY. SPENDING. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF CRORES. ON SO CALLED. ELECTIONS.
S V R Gandhi
January 5, 2013 at 4:48 pm
I strongly believe that the Honourable Supreme court should have condemned the appointment of Lokayukta as the Governor failed to consult the counsil of Ministers of Gujarat Government as per Law, and with that observation the Supreme Court should have fixed time for appointment of Lokayukta by follwing the procedure as per law in view of the long pending of filling of post of Lokayukta.
Vikas Lakhanpal
January 10, 2013 at 1:27 am
You are doing a very good job to nake congress sponsored Media particularly NDTV. Keep it up!!
khushbu goyal
January 11, 2013 at 4:35 pm
Great job…….very nice article….NDTV is a congress chanel.i agree.
Rajalakshmi
January 11, 2013 at 9:32 pm
BJP and all self respecting HINDUS should stay away from Indian tv channels like ndtv , cnn-ibn & arnab goswamis.Ensure congress & their allies become extinct altogether.
They are the most treasonous of all.
All HINDUS should unite & vote for Sri.Narendra Modi.
sujit singh
February 12, 2013 at 12:57 pm
A real eye opener, which I really didn’t expected, why don’t anyone from gujarat government file a case against such news agencies like NDTV.