Continue with Google
KATHMANDU, June 17: A petition has been filed at the Supreme Court (SC) calling for an end to the intimidation of media by government agencies.
Advocate Ananta Raj Luitel submitted the petition stating that government bodies have been arresting editors and journalists merely for publishing or broadcasting news. He argues that such actions constitute harassment and are a serious infringement on the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The petition seeks an interim order to prevent further obstruction of this fundamental right. Officials at the Supreme Court confirmed that the petition is currently under review.
Luitel highlighted that a writ he filed on January 8, 2020 at the Constitutional Bench—challenging restrictions on freedom of expression and warning of potential arrests of journalists—is still sub judice. In light of recent developments, he has submitted this supplementary petition seeking an interim order to stop the arrest and intimidation of editors under the guise of legal proceedings.
Writ petition filed against renewal of online media
This latest petition calls for the matter to be considered in relation to the earlier case already pending before the Constitutional Bench. It demands that editors and journalists not be detained or harassed simply for publishing news content.
The final hearing on the original writ—filed in 2076 BS against provisions of the Advertisement Regulation Act, 2076—is scheduled for August 12. The petition claims that several provisions of the Act, including Sections 8(1), 8(2), and 15(b), provide the state with undue authority to control media through pre-publication restrictions on advertising content. It also challenges Section 15(d), which prohibits the dissemination of misleading, provocative, indecent, discriminatory, or otherwise unlawful advertisements, arguing that such vague language enables excessive government control over the media.
Section 23(1) of the Act authorises provincial ministries to monitor whether advertisements published or broadcast via print and electronic media comply with legal standards, while Section 23(3) allows for the suspension or removal of ads found to be in violation. The petition contends that these provisions clearly contradict Article 19 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression.
Additionally, Sections 23(4) and 23(5) provide for punitive action and grant provincial governments broad powers of regulation. Sections 25(4) and 25(5) further stipulate that editors may be held personally liable for publishing content deemed to violate the Act—raising serious concerns about press freedom and editorial independence.
The petition notes that despite the original writ still being under consideration by the court, authorities have already begun taking coercive action against editors and journalists based solely on their published reporting. Such actions—including the issuance of arrest warrants—amount to intimidation of the press, which serves as the fourth pillar of democracy. These acts, it argues, are undermining the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 17 and 19.
Accordingly, the petition seeks an interim order barring government agencies from detaining, obstructing, or harassing editors and journalists solely on the basis of their published or broadcast content.
