Algerian Journalist Khaled Drareni’s Prison Term Reduced But Only by a Year

Algerian journalist Khaled Drareni, who was sentenced to three years in prison by an Algiers court last month, was re-sentenced to a reduced prison term of two years on September 15, Tuesday, following an appeal. This was announced in a statement released by the National Committee for the Release of Detainees. 

The Sidi M’hamed court in Algiers had on August 10 sentenced Drareni to a three-year prison term, along with a fine of 50,000 Algerian Dinars (around USD 400). Two other co-defendants, Hirak movement activists Samir Benlarbi and Slimane Hamitouche, were also sentenced to two years in prison along with Drareni. The two have now received reduced sentences of four months in prison each, and a one year-suspended prison term. They were released on the time served.

Drareni was arrested on March 29 while he was covering the anti-establishment Hirak (movement) protests that have swept Algeria for over a year. He was charged with “inciting an unarmed gathering” and “endangering national unity”, as well as for criticising Algerian president Abdelmadjid Tebboune and the government on social media. He had called out the government for widespread corruption and political mismanagement of the country, which were the primary causes for the rise of the Hirak protests. Drareni had also expressed solidarity with the Hirak protesters and encouraged them to continue the protest until they achieve their goals of political, social and economic reform in Algeria.

Last week, @TLHumanRights Co-Chairs @RepMcGovern and @RepChrisSmith wrote to the Algerian Ambassador expressing their concerns for press freedom in #Algeria and calling for the unconditional release of journalist #KhaledDrareni. #Journalismisnotacrime https://t.co/ULDN5YajUG

— Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission (@TLHumanRights) September 17, 2020

Chekib Drareni, Khaled’s brother, denounced the court’s judgement, saying in a tweet that he is “disgusted, shocked and disappointed by the court’s decision, which once again reinforces injustice in Algeria.” Drareni’s lawyer, Mustapha Bouchachi, told reporters that the defense team now intends to appeal to the Algerian supreme court. Several international press freedom and human rights organisations, including Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and Amnesty International, also condemned the court’s judgement.

RSF secretary general, in a statement responding to the verdict, said, “We are outraged by the blind stubbornness of the Algerian judges who have just condemned (Drareni) to 2 years in prison. Khaled’s detention proves the regime locks itself into a logic of absurd, unfair and violent repression.” Amnesty International demanded the unconditional release of Drareni and other activists, lawyers, journalists and political prisoners who are being unjustly detained by government authorities.

An international campaign launched to secure Drareni’s release has organised rallies in cities in multiple countries in the last few weeks. Journalists affiliated to the National Khaled Drareni Support Committee organised a rally on September 14, Monday, at the Tahar-Djaout press house in Algiers. Journalists have been gathering at the press house for the last three weeks in support of Drareni and to demand his release. Similarly, French journalists staged a rally last week outside the Algerian embassy in Paris to apply international pressure on the Algerian government. Tunisian journalists also demonstrated in front of their union’s headquarters on the same day to show their solidarity and support for Drareni and demand his release.

Attorney General KK Venugopal refuses to initiate contempt proceedings against TV journalist Rajdeep Sardesai

New Delhi: Senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai should not be prosecuted for contempt, the attorney general has said, rejecting requests to file a case against the television news anchor for tweets that were accused of criticising the Supreme Court. 

Attorney General KK Venugopal's office had received a request to begin contempt proceedings against Mr Sardesai for his comments on the Supreme Court ruling that found senior advocate Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt last month. The petitioner had reportedly mentioned a number of tweets by the journalist on the day the court fined Mr Bhushan Rs. 1 for his social media posts on the judiciary and the Chief Justice. 

 Rejecting the request to prosecute Mr Sardesai, the attorney general said, "Trifling remarks and mere passing criticism though perhaps distasteful are unlikely to tarnish the image of the institution." 
Last month, Mr Venugopal declined permission to an advocate to file a contempt plea against actor Swara Bhasker for comments on the Supreme Court's verdict in the Babri Masjid and Ayodhya land dispute case. 

Cases for contempt have drawn increased public interest after lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan was held guilty of the same charge last month that have stoked discussions on free speech and dissent. Mr Bhushan, the court ruled, had crossed a line in making comments about the judiciary.

BREAKING: AG KK Venugopal declines consent for initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against @sardesairajdeep for a series of statements made on Twitter. #CriminalContempt #ContemptofCourt #SupremeCourtOfIndia pic.twitter.com/EnHiAUhPV7

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 17, 2020

Mr Bhushan, in his defence, said he considered his tweets "as an attempt for working for the betterment of the institution", and that open criticism was necessary to safeguard democracy in India. 

The attorney general, who had himself filed a contempt petition in the Supreme Court against Mr Bhushan last year for comments on the appointment of former interim chief of CBI M Nageswara Rao, this time, urged the court to ignore the veteran lawyer's tweets.

Supreme court of India said, need to regulate electronic media; most of the channels are running for TRPs, leading to more sensationalism

New Delhi: There is a need to regulate the electronic media as most of the channels are running for TRPs, leading to more sensationalism, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday even as the Centre batted for journalistic freedom saying it would be disastrous for any democracy to control the press.

The apex court, making clear it is not suggesting censorship on media, said there should be some kind of self-regulation in the media. Regulating internet is very difficult but we need to regulate the electronic media now, a bench headed by Justice D Y Chandrachud said. The top court said this while hearing a plea which has raised grievance over Sudarshan TV's Bindas Bol' programme whose promo had claimed that the channel would show the 'big expose on conspiracy to infiltrate Muslims in government service'.

While the apex court said that some kind of self-regulation in media was needed, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that freedom of journalist is supreme. It would be disastrous for any democracy to control press, Mehta told the bench, also comprising Justices Indu Malhotra and K M Joseph.

The bench restrained Sudarshan TV from telecasting two episodes of 'Bindas Bol' programme, scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday, saying it prime facie appears to vilify the Muslim community. During the hearing conducted through video-conferencing, the apex court said that most of the channels are running for TRPs.



Mehta said sometimes certain channels are being used for providing the medium to accused to point his or her views. Mehta also said that it needs to be seen if a potential accused could be given a platform to air his or her defense. The problem with electronic media is all about TRPs, thus leading to more and more sensationalism. So many things masquerade as a form of right, the bench observed.

We are not saying states will impose any such guidelines as it would be an anathema to Article 19 of freedom of speech and expression, the bench said. The apex court said the electronic media has become more powerful than print media and we have not been supportive of pre-broadcast ban.

I am not necessarily saying that electronic media should be regulated by the state but there must be some kind of self-regulation, Justice Chandrachud said, adding, We are talking about the electronic media and not about the social media at the moment.



Mehta said that there should be some kind of self-regulation but the freedom of journalist has to be maintained. No freedom is absolute let me make myself clear on this, Justice Joseph told the solicitor general. Mehta told the bench that few years ago, some channels were saying Hindu terror, Hindu terror.

We are talking about the electronic media as today people may not read newspapers but may watch electric media, the bench said. Reading newspapers may not have entertainment value but the electronic media has got some entertainment value, it added.

The bench then referred to the criminal investigation being carried out by some media houses. When journalists operate, they need to work around right to fair comment. See criminal investigation, media often focuses only one part of the investigation, it said.

What are you doing?, the bench asked the counsel appearing for the News Broadcasters Association. We need to ask you if you exist apart from the letter head. What do you do when a parallel criminal investigation goes on in media and reputation is tarnished? The bench observed that the law does not have to regulate everything to regulate something.

Slovakia: Court acquitted the businessman in the murder of journalist Jan Kuciak, victim family disappointed

Pezinok, Slovakia: A panel of judges in Slovakia has acquitted a businessman accused of masterminding the slayings of an investigative journalist and his fiancee. Judge Ruzena Sabova at the Specialized Criminal Court in Pezinok announced the verdict on Thursday.

The verdict, handed down by a special criminal court that handles the country’s most serious cases, can be appealed in Slovakia’s Supreme Court. It is likely to draw scrutiny, because the murder ignited outrage across Slovakia and led to calls for reform. The journalist, Jan Kuciak, 27, was shot and killed with his fiancée, Martina Kusnirova, in February 2018 in his home in Velka Maca, a village outside Slovakia’s capital, Bratislava.

Their bodies were discovered days after the murder, and as evidence mounted that Mr. Kuciak was the target of an assassination, the killings set off the largest nationwide protests since the 1989 Velvet Revolution. The protests brought hundreds of thousands of people to the streets calling for a thorough investigation and condemning the systemic corruption that has long plagued the small Central European nation.


The victim’s families left the courtroom, many in tears, after the judge announced the verdict, saying they would appeal to the Supreme Court. “I’m very disappointed — I expected more of our justice system,” said Jozef Kuciak, the murdered journalist’s father. “But we’re definitely not giving up.”

Calls to restart investigation on #JanKuciak and Martina Kusnirova murders, "only then our faith in justice in Slovakia will be restored", IPI Vice Chair and @denniksme editor-in-chief @BalogovaBeata says

Full statement: https://t.co/USaLeddH9s pic.twitter.com/NTRig84zig

— IPI - The Global Network for Press Freedom (@globalfreemedia) September 3, 2020

The verdict came as a shock to many observers in Slovakia, and experts said it was likely to exacerbate the distrust that many Slovaks already have for the justice system and rule of law in their country.

“Despite the fact that I respect the decision of the court, I think justice was not found today,” said Michal Vasecka, a sociologist at the Bratislava Policy Institute. “And what is much worse, I think nobody ever looked for it in the first place.” The murders shocked the country and led to calls for sweeping reforms.

“The murder of Jan Kuciak and Martina Kusnirova has opened a window of opportunities, reflected by the society in a mass movement,” said Erik Lastic, the head of the political science department at Comenius University in Bratislava.

But the acquittal of Mr. Kocner and one of his associates, Alena Zsuzsovs, is likely to attract renewed scrutiny to the system. Another man on trial for the crime — Tomas Szabo, a former soldier — was found guilty and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

No relief to INX Media Co-Founder Indrani Mukerjea, special CBI Court rejects bail plea

Indrani Mukerjea with Peter 

Mumbai: A special CBI court here rejected the bail plea of Indrani Mukerjea, the prime accused in the Sheena Bora murder case, noting that the possibility of the accused influencing prosecution witnesses cannot be ruled out.

After failing to secure bail multiple times on medical grounds, Mukerjea in December last year filed another plea, seeking bail on "merits" of the case. Special CBI court judge J C Jagdale rejected the plea on Wednesday. The court observed thatsome important case witnesses like Rahul Mukerjea, son of accused Peter Mukerjea, and Vidhi, daughter of Indrani Mukerjea and her former husband and co- accused Sanjeev Khanna, were yet to be examined.

"There is no doubt that the accused is an influential and wealthyperson. Therefore, the possibility of influencing prosecution witnesses cannot be ruled out," the judge said. While arguing for bail, Indrani Mukerjea told court that the prosecution's case was "false and baseless" and she had nearly 120 documents to prove it.

She submitted that there is no scientific evidence to prove that the crime happened. She pointed out inconsistencies in the evidence put forth by the prosecution to prove her role as a conspirator and one of the killers of her daughter Sheena Bora. She also raised doubt about the "credibility and legality" of the probe.

Indrani Mukerjea claimed there are numerous contradictions in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, including accused-turned-approver Shayamwar Rai. "They have either contradicted their own statements, or the statements of other witnesses, or the prosecutions story itself," she had submitted. However, the judge in his order observed that in the middle of trial, the court cannot declare that the part evidence is either wholly reliable, or partly reliable, or totally unreliable.

"At the present juncture, the courtcannot conclude that the evidence led by Shyamvar Rai (approver) has falsified or suffered from fatal infirmities due to cross-examination of the said witness," the court noted. The judge further observed that at this stage, the trial court cannot pass a final conclusion about the evidentiary value of the witnesses.

"In my opinion, the accused and the advocate concerned should co-operate with the trial court to finish the said trial," the judge added. Indrani Mukerjea is currently lodged at the Byculla women's jail in Mumbai. Last month, the court rejected her another bail plea, citing the risk of contracting coronavirus in the wake of the disease outbreak in the jail.

Sheena Bora (24) was allegedly strangled in a car by Indrani Mukerjea, her then driver Shyamvar Rai and Sanjeev Khanna in April 2012. Her body was burnt in a forest in neighbouring Raigad district. Indrani Mukerjea was arrested in August 2015. 

Former media baron Peter Mukerjea was also later arrested for allegedly being part of the conspiracy. He is currently out on bail, which was granted by the Bombay High Court earlier this year. His 17-year-old marriage to Indrani Mukerjea ended during the period of incarceration as the two got divorced in October last year.