The law commission, the advising body to the law ministry is contemplating the merits of putting curbs on sting operations (SO) by media.

In a consultation paper released by the commission, it has elicited suggestions and comments from the public, including the media representatives, the NGOs, academia, social activists and elected representatives on regulation to check unwarranted sting operations in the light of invasion of right to privacy and its impact on sub -judice matters. The idea is also to delve on the extent of immunity for the journalists who at times, purportedly indulge into illegal acts during the course of sting operations.

“It has been observed that some of the SO(s) make considerable intrusion into private lives of people without serving any public interest and such operations are conducted by the television channels solely to increase their viewership,” reads the consultation paper along with suggesting maintaining of a proper balance between the right to privacy of an individual and public interest likely to be served by SO. It also says that some recent incidents prove the misuse of sting operations by the media and private entities to increase channel viewership, settle political scores, harm corporate interests and  malign reputation.

The media has often been caught off guard for resorting to illegitimate SO(s) through surreptitious ways which involve, among other things, covert recordings and laying of traps to entice people into wrong doings. A sting in 2007 showed a Delhi schoolteacher forcing girls into prostitution. But it was found to be incorrect and the journalists were prosecuted.

The only existing pertinent law to monitor the conduct of the media is the Cable and Television Networks (regulation) Act, 1995 has been found wanting in its scope and teeth to deal with the new age product (the SO) as the act was framed when SOs had not arrived on the television scene. Experts say it was with the Tehelka expose in 2001 - taped secret video footage of senior politicians, bureaucrats and army officers apparently taking money in connection with a fake defence deal during the Vajpayee government- that the term “sting operation by the media” was coined in India. They add that it used to be called “investigative journalism” until Tehelka happened. On similar lines, the supreme court had come down heavily on media in the Jessica Lal murder case observing there was a need of maintaining a distinction between trial by the media and informative media.

The government has proposed to set up an independent regulatory authority — the Broadcasting Regulatory Authority of India —under a new law, the Broadcasting regulatory Bill 2007. The Information and Broadcasting ministry has also put into place certain non-statutory and informal guidelines and machinery to keep an eye on objectionable broadcasts. The Electronic Media Monitoring centre of the I&B works round the clock and scan through the content of various FM and TV channels for any violation of Programme Code, Advertising Code and other relevant provisions of Cable and Television networks regulation Act.

In October 2008, the News Broadcasting Association, the umbrella body of TV news channels in India formed a self-regulatory body called News Broadcasting Standard Authority which consists of an eminent retired judge ,editors and experts in the field of law, education, medicine, literature and public administration. 

But whether such a self –regulatory mechanism has proved to be adequate and effective is a matter of debate. In the UK, there is a Broadcasting Standards Commission (BSC) which is accountable to British Parliament. The law commission has sought responses on whether India too should have an independent regulatory body on similar lines as the BSC.

The editors, however, have been resisting having such independent regulatory body citing reasons of infringement on the freedom of press.