On the India-Pakistan Subcontinent: Constitutions, Codes, and Conduct Since partition in 1947, India and Pakistan have gone their separate ways, their religious and political differences resulting in four wars and continuing friction between the two contiguous countries formerly united under the British crown. Tensions both internal and external seem to have marked their 64 years of independence. Neither country has emerged from colonialism with a sustained and full-fledged commitment to democratic values. India is rated “partly free” and Pakistan “not free” by Freedom House in its 2011 Freedom of the Press survey.
In both countries, journalists’ associations have promulgated codes of ethics, yet reporters have been jailed and sometimes murdered while doing their jobs.
“Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press,” says Article 19 of the Pakistani constitution, but then comes this: “subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defense of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, commission of or incitement to an offense.”
Article 19 of the Indian constitution uses much of the same wording, but the freedoms are also circumscribed, allowing “the State” to make any law restricting them “in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation of incitement to an offense.”
CIMA Research Report: Media Codes of Ethics
Strikingly, however, the constitutions of both countries contain articles guaranteeing freedom of the press–but with caveats.
In both countries, journalists’ associations have promulgated codes of ethics, yet reporters have been jailed and sometimes murdered while doing their jobs. But even while journalists may strive for the ideal, there are compromises with reality. “If you go to the Press Council of India [code of practice] and do a search for ‘truth,’ you won’t find it very often,” said Ward.58 “In Western codes, it’s right there.” But in countries like India, truth is often disputed. “They’d rather speak of methods of responsible journalism, that journalists are accurate, balanced, and don’t demean ethnic groups, or whip up tensions.” The word “truth” does appear six times in the 112-page document, and its first mention comes in the context of truth being no defense “for publishing derogatory, scurrilous and defamatory
Center for International Media Assistance
23