Deprivation of freedom of speech
The use of ECL against journalists for their writings constitutes a threat to the freedom of press. Cyril Almeida had simply filed a report about a meeting presided over by the Prime Minister where civil and military differences over the treatment of some of the terrorist networks were discussed. The tensions that arise from time to time between the government and the army are no secret. These are a matter of public interest and it is the duty of the media to report on them, a function it has performed in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Making an issue out of the report in the name of national security, a smokescreen often used to hide institutional failures, is thoroughly irrational and needs to be stopped. The media recognizes no sacred cows and is duty bound to keep the public aware of what is going on in the echelons of power. It also has a right to comment on such matters.
.
The concerned journalist filed the report on the basis of what he was ostensibly told by senior officials and participants of the meeting who would not have shared the information if they were forbidden from leaking it. The editor of the concerned english daily maintains that the report was verified, cross-checked and fact-checked. If the government is unhappy over the publication of the report it should talk to those who leaked the information to the media instead of shooting the messenger.
If the government has any grievance against media persons, the best way is to deal with it in accordance with the law. Putting journalists name on the ECL on the basis of a report amounts to depriving them of their right to free movement. This is in clear violation of Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which stipulates that “everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country”. The message the government is sending through the action to the world is not good for the country’s image.