Saleh Ahmed, councilor of Sylhet City Corporation's ward No 22, filed a case under Section 25 of the Digital Security Act against 18 people including reporters, the editor and publisher of Ekattorer Khota, a daily (online and print version) published from Sylhet after publication of reports about the activities of the councilor. We want to draw the attention of the policymakers of the government regarding the latest misuse of the much-hated act.
Like other democratic countries in the world, there was a time in Bangladesh when if any person or organisation was aggrieved about a new report, the person or the organisation would send a rejoinder to the concerned newspaper. They would not rush to the police station or the court to file cases. The concerned newspaper would take remedial measures. If the aggrieved persons were not pleased, they had scope to go to the press council. The press council would arrive at a decision hearing both the parties and analysing the published reports and the rejoinder. The press council would ask the newspaper to publish the statement of aggrieved person or organisation and would issued a warning if there was mistake. There was a practice of taking the responsible quarters to task if needed.
But those days are now history. Till a few days ago, the journalists were immensely harassed by cases filed against them under Section 57 of the Information and Communication Technology Act. Now the draconian DSA has taken the place of that act. Several sections of this law have become hurdles to the journalism profession. The Sylhet councilor did not send any rejoinder to the authorities of Ekatorrer Khota, but filed a case with the city's Shaporan police station which recorded the case without any examination of the matter. The reason may be the plaintiff is not only a city councilor but also a leader of the city unit ruling Awami League.
In the case statement, he alleged that the reports in Ekattorer Khota about him has disrupted the situation in the locality. He has been defamed by the reports which were also going viral in the social media including Facebook.
The Shahporan police station should have examined the reports published in the Ekatorrer Khota about the councilor instead of recording the case which is farcical and baseless. We think the case was lodged clearly for harassment and it should be cancelled. We want the amendment of the concerned sections of the draconian act to protect the journalism and the media.