by: Iqbal Bajar
“When a question becomes a crime, silence becomes the biggest threat”
The balance between state discipline and freedom of expression is the foundation of any civilized society. This balance comes into question when cases are registered against individuals like vlogger and journalist Adnan Rawat under various legal provisions and the matter is undergoing investigation. In recent cases, the application of laws like PPC 153-A, PPC 505, PPC 117 along with the Anti-Terrorism Act gives rise to a sensitive debate.
It is undeniable that respect for the law is mandatory for every citizen and the final decision of any case is to be taken by the courts. However, it is equally important that any individual, especially a journalist, should be seen in the context of his profession and expression of opinion. The case of vlogger and journalist Adnan Rawat also demands attention from the same angle, where the question arises whether his activities fall within the purview of journalism or are being interpreted in some other way.
The main purpose of journalism is to provide information and raise public awareness. In this context, if a journalist gives his opinion or reports on an issue, it immediately becomes a sensitive matter to view it in the context of incitement or fear-mongering. This is the point where both balance and caution become necessary.
The arrest and prolonged physical remand of vlogger and journalist Adnan Rawat has raised concerns in media circles. Such measures not only affect an individual but can also affect the journalistic environment as a whole. If journalists are faced with uncertainty while performing their professional duties, it also has an impact on the dissemination of information to the public.
On the other hand, it is also important to look at each case on the basis of its evidence and facts. Giving courts and investigative agencies a chance to do their job is part of the requirements of justice. However, in this process, fundamental rights and the principles of freedom of expression should not be ignored.
It is a fact that in democratic societies, tolerating differences of opinion and turning them into a constructive debate is a sign of progress. In such a situation, cases like those of vlogger and journalist Adnan Rawat force us to think about how we, as a society, are striking a balance between expression of opinion and the law.
In the end, it can be said that the rule of law and freedom of expression are not opposites but two important pillars of a balanced system. If harmony is maintained between them, not only justice is strengthened, but society also becomes more conscious and stable.
***
Share this content:
