NDTV’s Coercive Tactics to Gag MANUSHI

Bizarre Definition & Misuse of Law against Sexual Harassment

Author(s) : Madhu Purnima Kishwar

I am both puzzled and honored by the fact that NDTV has singled me out for legal notice for “defamation and slander” after MANUSHI published report on NDTV’s alleged involvement in a mega money laundering scam. Ram Jethmalani had already made public his correspondence with Chidambaram on this scam. But Ram has not been served a legal notice. If anything, Prannoy Roy went and personally pleaded with Jethmalani pleading with him not to take up the case. Likewise, Gurumurthy has not been sent a legal notice for bringing the matter in the public domain. NDTV bosses are busy trying to convince Gurumurthy of their innocence!   Does it mean NDTV considers MANUSHI as a bigger threat? Or do NDTV bosses think I can be frightened and silenced more easily?   Farcical Notice Using Manu Singhvi Strategy:The legal notice sent to me, MANUSHI TRUST and MANUSHI SANGATHAN by NDTV is actually farcical beyond belief. It is dated 16 January 2014 and gave me 24 hour notice to “post a full and complete apology” for my “illegal and irresponsible actions”. But the Notice was served to me on Saturday, 18 January, 20014 afternoon—both by courier and hand delivered by a 4 member team from Luthra & Luthra Associates. Thus the notice was served to me long past the deadline for the demanded “apology”!   Clearly, NDTV’s calculation is that on Monday, they will use Manu Singhvi strategy of getting the court to order me to remove my article as well as the video of Srivastava’s conversation with his lawyer andto restrain me from publishing anything further on the subject.   NDTV bosses charge me with having used an “anonymous bundle of papers” for putting in the public domain all the charges against them. I repeat what I said in my original article, the bundle of papers may have come from an anonymous source but the documents it contained are official proceedings of Income Tax department as well as court orders. (For the article that invited this legal notice click here) An Independent Voice like MANUSHI a Threat to Politically Patronized Media: It is not surprising that a politically patronized media organization like NDTV, which has many a skeletons in its cupboard, should want to gag a voice like MANUSHI which is widely respected as one of the few independent, nonpartisan platforms in Indian journalism. MANUSHI chose the difficult path of being a reader supported magazine. As a policy we neither accept commercial or even government ads, nor take grants from any international donor agency. We have survived on a shoe string budget mainly through unpaid voluntary labour. Every single contribution to MANUSHI along with our annual audited accounts is posted on our website as a routine act of transparency.     NDTV bosses need to answer the substantive questions raised by the MANUSHI, instead of trying to use the courts to shut one of the few surviving voices of independent journalism. The Notice quotes selectively from certain court orders as a peg to frighten MANUSHI. But those court orders have no connection with charges of money laundering and tax evasion against NDTV.    NDTV avoids mention of the latest order of the CBI Court dated 14 December 2011 which left the issues raised by Srivastava before that Court open on merit.    Bizarre Definition of Sexual Harassment: Regarding the alleged sexual harassment of two women officers by Srivastava, NDTV is either concealing or deliberately ignoring the inquiry report of the Vishakha Committee of the Income Tax Department which was headed by a female Chief Commissioner of IT and also had a female advocate practicing in the Supreme Court as its member among several other female members. All of them came to the conclusion that there was no substance in the charge of sexual harassment. It is noteworthy that these two women had projected Srivastava’s complaints of corruption against them as an instance of sexual harassment.  This amounts to saying that a woman is right in crying rape simply because someone caught her stealing. Even they did not make a case that Srivastava had molested them or made sexual advances. This is gross misuse of the law meant toprotect women from sexual assaults and demeaning forms of sexual attention. (Click here for the report of Vishakha Committee of IT Department).   This is the key reason why the Vishakha Committee rejected the charge of sexual harassment leveled by Sumana Sen (IRS 99005) and Ashima Neb (IRS 99010) against Srivastava. Tomorrow Barkha Dutt might sue Madhu Kishwar on charges of sexual harassment because I’ve published an account of the alleged financial fraud Barkha is part of!   No Reply to Bribe Charges: The notice has conveniently ignored the nexus between one of these two officers (Sumana Sen) & NDTV. Sen’s husband was employed by NDTV while she was working as Assessing Officer of NDTV and all its directors. She concealed from the IT authorities, this fact of conflict of interest.  She travelled abroad for pleasure at the cost of the NDTV while acting as Assessing officer of NDTV.  This fact too is being concealed by NDTV.    The notice is vainly preaching to me what NDTV does not practice. I’m accused of not having taken their version into account. But I relied on ongoing court cases and documents; mine was not an opinion piece.  Did NDTV take into account Srivastava’s version when they run a news article on this issue on 16 January 2014? In that news report they did not even disclose their own vested interest, including the entrenched commercial interest of NDTV in the matter.   The notice also conceals the order dated 31/12/2013 of the Dispute Resolution Panel of Income Tax Department – a statutory authority – which has upheld the findings of money laundering by the Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs 900 crores in one year alone (2009-2010).    Besides, the Notice also conceals that NDTV moved the Delhi High Court in the Writ Petition (Civil No. 7312 of 2013) seeking a restraint against Income Tax Department and the Dispute Resolution Panel from considering the evidence of Srivastava.  NDTV immediately withdrew their Writ Petition when the Court enquired why Srivastava had not been impleaded by NDTV.What is more, the Income Tax Department went ahead and recorded the evidence of Srivastava rejecting the objections of NDTV in the matter. (For statement of Srivastava recorded on oath click here).   NDTV could not muster courage to cross examine Srivastava though called upon to do so by the Income Tax Department. This in itself speaks volumes about the credibility of NDTV in this case.   MANUSHI has merely discharged its journalistic obligations in furtherance of larger public interest.  Those who think that they are adversely affected by it should answer the issues on merit, instead of attempting to gag the MANUSHI and intimidate it into silence. It is particularly reprehensible coming from a media house which misused journalistic freedom for devious purposes and serving partisan political ends.    For viewing S.K. Srivastava’s account to his lawyers, click here for video.   (Links to Ram Jethmalani letters: http://www.scribd.com/doc/190072062/Ram-Jethmalani-s-letter-to-P-Chidambaram-in-NDTV-money-laundering-matter, http://www.scribd.com/doc/193677788/P-Chidambaram%E2%80%99s-reply-to-Ram-Jethmalani-and-Ram-Jethmalani-s-reply-to-P-Chidambaram-in-NDTV-money-laundering-matter)  Source: http://www.manushi.in/articles.php?articleId=1751#.UtvBBBC6aM