A study co-authored by NLU, Delhi, revealed that reporting on public officials, religious matters, and protests are the top three reasons journalists in India face criminal charges. The report, "Pressing charges," analyzed 423 cases against 427 journalists from 2012-2022, finding that 40% were arrested. Journalists from smaller towns and those reporting in regional languages were most impacted, often without national media attention. Common charges included public tranquility offenses, criminal intimidation, defamation, and offenses against public servants and religion. This trend raises serious constitutional concerns regarding freedom of the press in a democracy.
- Reporting on public officials, religious matters, and protests are the most common reasons for criminal charges against journalists in India.
- The study found that journalists in smaller towns and regional media are disproportionately affected, with 40% of those covered being arrested.
- Criminal charges frequently invoked include those related to public tranquility, defamation, and offenses against public servants.
The Tamil Nadu government will send a list of eligible Director-General of Police (DGP) rank officers to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for shortlisting a panel to appoint the next DGP/Head of Police Force. This process complies with Supreme Court guidelines from the Prakash Singh case. The incumbent DGP, Shankar Jiwal, completes his tenure on August 31. Revised guidelines from the Ministry of Home Affairs state that only DGP-rank officers in the Level-16 pay matrix are eligible, a change from earlier rules that included all IPS officers with 30 years of service. The UPSC empanelment committee will shortlist three officers for the state to choose from.
- Tamil Nadu government is initiating the process to appoint the next DGP/Head of Police Force by sending a list to UPSC.
- The selection process adheres to Supreme Court guidelines from the Prakash Singh case.
- Revised guidelines from the Ministry of Home Affairs specify eligibility criteria for DGP candidates, limiting it to Level-16 pay matrix officers.
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has raised concerns about potential disenfranchisement of lakhs of citizens. The process is criticized for being opaque, hurried, and imposing onerous burdens on voters, especially those added after 2003, who must re-establish eligibility with fresh applications. The ECI's notification lists only 11 acceptable proofs, notably omitting widely held documents like Aadhaar, ration cards, and even ECI-issued EPICs. The Supreme Court has intervened, urging the ECI to consider these omitted documents, emphasizing that electoral roll preparation must meet constitutional standards of fairness, transparency, and non-discrimination, as the right to vote is fundamental to democracy.
- The Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar is causing concern over potential voter disenfranchisement.
- The revision process is criticized for being opaque, hurried, and imposing excessive burdens on voters, particularly those added after 2003.
- The ECI's list of acceptable documents for re-establishing eligibility omits widely held proofs like Aadhaar, ration cards, and ECI-issued EPICs.
The Election Commission of India (EC) has initiated a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, sparking a debate on the term 'ordinarily resident'. According to the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act), a person must be 'ordinarily resident' in a constituency to be included in its electoral roll. The Gauhati High Court defined it as a "habitual resident" with the intention to dwell permanently, not temporarily. The article highlights the vulnerability of migrant labourers, who often move for work but maintain ties with their original residence. It suggests that strict interpretation could disenfranchise them and proposes amending the RP Act or RER to preserve their choice of retaining votes in their original constituency.
- The term 'ordinarily resident' is crucial for inclusion in India's electoral rolls, as defined by the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
- Judicial interpretations emphasize that 'ordinarily resident' implies habitual and permanent residency, not temporary stays.
- Migrant labourers face challenges, as their temporary work locations conflict with the strict definition, potentially leading to disenfranchisement.
The article argues that India's secularism was inherent in its foundational principles, influenced by leaders like Nehru and Ashoka the Great, long before the term was explicitly added to the Constitution in 1976. It highlights that the Motilal Nehru Committee's constitution (1928) and the Karachi Resolution (1931) already advocated for no state religion and state neutrality. The author emphasizes that secularism protects religions from state interference and ensures their autonomy, contrasting it with theocratic states. The piece also discusses various models of secularism from other democracies and asserts that India's secularism promotes civility and equal respect for all religions, making its explicit inclusion in 1976 a formal recognition of an existing ideal.
- India's secular ethos was present from its inception, rooted in historical figures like Ashoka and pre-independence constitutional drafts.
- Secularism, though explicitly added in 1976, was considered part of the basic structure of the Constitution even before.
- The author argues that secularism safeguards religious autonomy and prevents state domination over religious matters.
The article discusses the Supreme Court's observations on Bihar's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, emphasizing the need to safeguard the 'right to vote.' The Court urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) to include more accessible documents like Aadhaar and ration cards for identity verification, asserting that the ECI's mandate under Article 324 is to facilitate democratic participation, not create obstacles. While the 'right to vote' is legally a statutory right (under Section 62 of RPA, 1951), not a fundamental one, the Court considers it a 'democratic imperative.' The article highlights India's commitment to universal adult suffrage (Article 326) and the importance of accurate electoral rolls to prevent disenfranchisement and ensure electoral integrity.
- The Supreme Court has underscored the importance of the 'right to vote' as fundamental to India's democracy, urging the ECI to ensure inclusivity in electoral roll revisions.
- The ECI's mandate under Article 324 is to facilitate democratic participation, not to create barriers to voting.
- While legally a statutory right, the right to vote is considered a 'democratic imperative' for the survival of the Indian republic.
The Supreme Court observed that the Election Commission of India (ECI) should consider including Aadhaar, the Elector Photo Identity Card (EPIC), and ration cards as acceptable documents for identity verification during Bihar's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Court criticized the ECI's restrictive list of 11 documents, stating that the entire exercise is about identity, not citizenship, and questioned the exclusion of Aadhaar. The Court reiterated that the ECI's mandate under Article 324 is to facilitate democratic participation, not create obstacles, emphasizing the 'right to vote' as fundamental to democracy.
- The Supreme Court has urged the ECI to expand the list of acceptable documents for voter identity verification, including Aadhaar and ration cards.
- The Court highlighted that the electoral roll revision (SIR) is primarily for identity verification, not citizenship proof.
- The ECI's mandate under Article 324 is to ensure democratic participation, not to create barriers to voting.
Amidst controversy over valid documents for voter registration in Bihar, the Election Commission's March 2023 manual empowers Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to decide on voter inclusion or exclusion even in the absence of required documents. EROs can base their decisions on field verification, reports from Booth-Level Officers (BLOs), and testimonials from village heads or families. Proof of age can include an oath from parents or a 'Sarpanch', or even a visible examination by the BLO. Opposition parties, however, warn that EROs, being state government functionaries, could be influenced by the ruling party, potentially leading to biased decisions.
- Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) are empowered by the EC manual to decide on voter inclusion even without complete documentation.
- EROs can rely on field verification, BLO reports, and testimonials from local authorities or family members for proof of age and residence.
- The discretion granted to EROs is a point of concern for opposition parties, who fear potential political influence on their decisions.
The Centre has not decided whether to update the National Population Register (NPR) during the upcoming Census 2027, senior Home Ministry officials informed Census directors at a preparatory meeting. The NPR, first created in 2010 and updated in 2015-16, is considered the initial step towards creating a National Register of Citizens (NRC) under the Citizenship Rules, 2003. Unlike Census data, which is shared in aggregate format, NPR data contains household-wise details of 119 crore usual residents and can be shared with Central and State governments and agencies. The 2027 Census will be the first to use mobile apps for data collection.
- The Union government has not yet decided on updating the National Population Register (NPR) alongside the upcoming Census 2027.
- The NPR is considered the first step towards establishing a National Register of Citizens (NRC) under the Citizenship Act, 1955.
- NPR data, unlike Census data, includes specific individual and household details and can be shared with government agencies.
A disturbing pattern of custodial deaths persists in India, particularly in Tamil Nadu, with zero police convictions despite numerous reported cases. Data from 2016-2022 reveals 490 deaths in Tamil Nadu and 11,656 nationwide in judicial/police custody, with Uttar Pradesh reporting the highest number. While magisterial inquiries were ordered in 345 cases and 123 policemen arrested, none were convicted. The data also highlights a disproportionate targeting of Scheduled Castes (SCs) in preventive detentions in Tamil Nadu, where 38.5% of detenues were SCs compared to their 20% population share. This underscores a severe lack of accountability and systemic issues in policing and human rights enforcement.
- Custodial deaths are a persistent issue in India, with Tamil Nadu showing a significant number but zero police convictions.
- Despite arrests and chargesheets against police personnel for human rights violations, convictions remain negligible.
- Scheduled Castes are disproportionately targeted in preventive detentions in Tamil Nadu, indicating systemic discrimination.