MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has directed a private television channel to issue a public apology for airing a promotional video containing inappropriate and historically incorrect remarks about freedom fighter VO Chidambaram Pillai.
Accepting an undertaking given by the channel’s counsel that they are ready to apologise and adopt a restorative course, Justice L Victoria Gowri further directed the channel to conduct a state-level elocution competition about the life, sacrifices, legal career, Swadeshi enterprise and economic vision of the VOC every year on his birth anniversary (September 5), in coordination with the education department and recognized educational institutions.
She also told the channel to procure and distribute 1,000 books concerning the freedom fighter and his achievements and sacrifice to government school students free of cost. An educational programme or documentary of reasonable duration about the freedom fighter should also be telecasted by the channel every year on September 5, she added.
Justice Gowri gave the directions on a petition filed by R Kanagavel Pandian, president of Makkal Thalaivan VOC Makkal Nala Peravai, seeking registration of FIR against the channel and its crew for a 30-second promotional video it telecast in the channel and on social media platforms on July 23.
In the video, four persons- two men and two women- were seen having a conversation in which they ridicule the freedom fighter with reference to his Swadeshi Steam Navigation Company and the appellation ‘Chekkizhutha Semmal’. The judge said the criminal proceedings need not be pursued further in view of the remorse expressed by the channel.
However, she was concerned about the effect of such content upon children and young adults. “Entertainment is a legitimate and valuable pursuit, but the quest for ratings cannot justify the distortion of national history or the humiliation of those whose suffering made constitutional liberty possible,” she observed. The judge clarified that the directions should not be treated as a finding of criminal guilt against the channel, its producer or staff.