NEW DELHI, JULY 16: The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has contradicted the Home Ministry's repeated claim that journalists would not come under the purview of the proposed anti-terrorist law.While attacking the draft Prevention of Terrorism Bill on various grounds, the NHRC said that Section 3(8) which imposed imprisonment up to one year on anybody who failed to disclose information about terrorism would have ``a chilling effect on human rights.''Headed by former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma, the NHRC also took a serious view of the even more draconian provision, Section 14, which imposed imprisonment up to three years on anybody who failed to furnish the information called for by an investigating officer on any offence under the Bill.In the context of these two Sections, the NHRC said in its nine-page opinion on July 14 that ``the Bill could gravely jeopardise the work of professionals such as journalists.''Further, the NHRC held that the two anti-Press provisions would ``run counter'' to Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which India was a signatory. Article 19 deals with the right to the freedom of expression which includes the general right ``to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds.''The NHRC's stand confirms The Indian Express report on May 29 pointing out the adverse effect TADA-II could have on the media. The Home Ministry has since tried to downplay the import of Sections 3(8) and 14 by saying they were merely a reiteration of the already existing provisions in the ordinary criminal law. The truth is none of the current provisions are as stringently worded as TADA-II and neither do they carry such severe penalties.The Law Commission, which drafted the controversial Bill, has come up with an even more specious explanation to allay the apprehensions of journalists. It said that when a journalist was found guilty under the proposed law for not divulging his sources, he might get away with a mere fine because the court would have discretion in deciding the quantum of punishment.Not surprisingly, jurist Rajeev Dhavan says that under the proposed anti-terrorist law all journalists would have to serve as spies for the Government. ``If they refuse to act as spies, they will be either prosecuted or forced to desist from good and effective journalism,'' he observed. ``Either way, Indian democracy will be the loser.''
