HRF/171/07

06 August 2007

Convicted by the Media

Arun Fereira (also spelled Ferriera or Perrira in some accounts) received a flurry of negative coverage in the Indian press after he was arrested on 8 May 2007. Fereira was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, along with three others, in Nagpur, a major city in the Indian state of Maharashtra. Police assert that Fereira was a communications and propaganda head for the Naxalites, a Maoist group in India that often resorts to violence. Though there is some variability in the Indian media’s portrayal of his culpability, most Indian newspapers have generally accepted the police’s claims about Fereira’s involvement in illegal activities with the Naxalites. Accordingly, the Indian media is manufacturing hype around Fereira, depicting him as a threat to society without any solid basis for these conclusions. 

Fereira’s treatment is an example of a ‘trial by media’ that violates the principles of the right to a fair trial, including the bedrock of criminal justice in a democratic system of government—that one should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. In Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court explained that a “[f]air trial obviously would mean a trial before an impartial Judge, a fair prosecutor and atmosphere of judicial calm. Fair trial means a trial in which bias or prejudice for or against the accused, the witnesses, or the cause which is being tried is eliminated.” The media’s portrayal of Ferreira meets none of these requirements.  

It is up to an impartial court, and not the media, to give the verdict on Fereira’s innocence or guilt. Newspapers and other media have a responsibility to clearly state that Fereira has yet to be found guilty of anything. This is a much more serious matter than merely protecting someone’s public reputation, though that is serious enough. The media’s vilification of suspects like Fereira encourages police to torture them with impunity while in custody—a development that has already occurred according to Fereira’s court filings. In other instances of ‘trials by media’, the negative publicity created by the press has made it very difficult for suspects to even find a lawyer willing to represent them. 

In articles discussing Fereira’s arrest, at least two newspapers directly call him a Naxalite leader with hardly any reservation. Others, at least on occasion, write that Fereira is only an alleged Naxalite, but still tend to assume that Fereira is guilty. Another problematic aspect of the newspapers’ accounts of Fereira is their lack of independent research and reporting; instead, newspapers often just repeat what police say, in effect transforming them into police spokespersons. The scant information outside of quotes by police comes from brief interviews with neighbours, friends, and family members, hardly the stuff of investigative journalism. 

For instance, The Hitavada, which claims to be the ‘oldest and largest circulated English news daily in Central India’, calls Fereira one of the ‘dreaded Naxalites’ in ‘PCR for Naxal Murli, others till June 5’ (29 May 2007) without noting that his activities are only alleged and not proven by the government. A Kolkata paper, The Statesman, in ‘Bandra boy casts Naxal net over Mumbai’ (12 May 2007) also flatly calls Fereira a Naxalite, in addition to being its ‘propaganda and communications head’. In addition, the Statesman article states that Fereira wanted to help the People’s War Group (one of the key Naxalite groups) “foment fresh trouble with the help of Dalits in Ramabai Ambedkar Nagar in the eastern suburb of Ghatkopar, Mumbai on 14 July”, without citing any evidence for this beyond police statements. 

Other newspapers offer conflicting accounts of Fereira, ostensibly seeking to provide greater objectivity, but in effect adding to Fereira’s negative image. The Times of India characterised Fereira as a Naxalite leader. For example, in ‘Magisterial custody for Naxals’ (21 May 2007), Fereira is listed as one of the ‘hardcore Naxals’, and the newspaper notes that he is not cooperating with police in providing information. This statement presupposes Fereira is a Naxal and has information to offer. Ironically, the Times’ most balanced piece on Fereira was an op-ed article. In ‘Accused by the pen drive’ (27 May 2007), Shobhan Saxena criticised the treatment of Fereira, noting that ‘[w]e don’t know if Arun Fereira from Bandra is a member of the CPI (Maoist) or not, or if he has been involved in any violent act, but the police have already passed a judgement.’ While Saxena criticises the police for passing judgment, perhaps he should have also condemned the coverage of the newspaper he was writing for, as well as that of the media as a whole. 

Mid Day, a Mumbai-based afternoon newspaper, also ran a number of articles about Fereira. In the text of one such article, Mid Day properly notes that Fereira is only an alleged Naxalite. The article’s headline, however, which shapes people’s initial perceptions, clearly labels Fereira a Naxal: ‘Bandra Naxal did not confess’ (12 May 2007).  

Mumbai Mirror, a newspaper affiliated with The Times of India, printed an article, ‘Bandra man’s family clueless on naxal links’ (11 May 2007), which includes hyperbole in its description of Fereira. For example: “The 35-year-old alumnus of Mumbai’s St Xavier’s college and Bandra resident, played social activist by day and was a feared Naxal leader in his secret avatar.” A photograph of a masked man holding an AK-47 appears next to the article without any caption. Though later in the article the interview of an uncle is included disputing the claims, the author’s intention is to create the inference that Fereira is a dangerous Naxalite even if the evidence does not support such a judgment. A later article (‘No Naxal threat in city: Jadhav’) quotes police as saying, “he was the chief of propaganda of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist) and was responsible for a lot of violence”, but provides no substantial instances of violence for which Fereira was allegedly responsible. 

Daily News and Analysis, an English newspaper published in Mumbai, also published a number of articles about Fereira. With the exception of two interviews with neighbours, the articles relied primarily on police statements about Fereira. Several of the articles, however, reveal the evidentiary problems that the police face with Fereira. ‘Naxal net spreads to cities, CM asks Centre for assistance’ (12 May 2007) reports that the arrest of Fereira “is indicative of a Naxalite game plan to penetrate major cities like Mumbai, Pune, and Nashik.” The article uncritically repeats a police officer’s assertion that “[a]s Ferreira was managing communications and propaganda, he may have been scouting for issues needed to increase the support base.” ‘Naxalites making inroads into cities’ (12 May 2007) reports the police’s beliefs that Fereira might have had a central role in the Maharashtra committee of the Maoists operating out of Mumbai. The article does little to indicate whether the police have proof of the extent of Fereira’s involvement, if any. 

In ‘Ferreira case has national implications’ (14 May 2007), Daily News and Analysis reports police claims that Ferreira’s case will help them investigate the leadership of the Naxalites, and that his pen-drive allegedly contains ‘“sensitive” information about possible targets and various anti-establishment strategies’. This ‘sensitive information’, as it was later reported, consisted of information about the operation of the dabbawallas in Mumbai—the men who deliver homemade lunches in boxes to office workers across Mumbai city. How information about dabbawallas can be considered vital information about the Naxalites and prove that Fereira was involved with the group is puzzling. The only explanation reported by Daily News and Analysis was one provided by the police—Fereira must have been using the file to facilitate a Naxal infiltration of the dabbawallas. But as many acquaintances have noted, Fereira was a social worker, so it is a perfectly reasonable possibility that he had information about the dabbawallas because he was working to improve their social conditions. But that sort of alternative explanation did not usually surface in press accounts. 

Regardless of Fereira’s actual guilt or innocence, the media’s vilification of Fereira for what amounts to being arrested with information about dabbawallas on his pen drive is reprehensible. When one sifts through the articles and discounts the reported conjecture by the police, there is a dearth of real evidence of any illegal actions or Fereira’s actual involvement in Naxalite activities. The headlines and the irresponsible reporting of vague or unsubstantiated facts, however, have publicly smeared Fereira as a dangerous extremist seeking to spread Naxalism, and have in effect returned a verdict of guilty against him before he has had a chance to defend himself in court. The mainstream media cannot act like the propaganda arm of India’s security apparatus. Instead, it must take a critical view of the actions of State authorities to ensure that constitutional rights and freedoms are respected, and that public condemnation is reserved for those who have been proven guilty.

About SAHRDC / Action Alerts / Human Rights Features / Publications /  Online Resource Centre / Home