IFJ condemns ban on newspaper, attack on delivery van in Assam

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has condemned the “ban” imposed on a daily newspaper, Asomiya Protidin, by a political party in Assam. According to information received from an IFJ affiliate, the Indian Journalists’ Union (IJU), armed vigilantes belonging to the Bodo People’s Front (BPF), intercepted a delivery van belonging to the newspaper on February 25 in Kokrajhar district of Assam, and destroyed its entire cargo of the day’s edition, before setting the van ablaze.

BPF, IFJ learnt, is a former insurgent group that now is the principal constituent of the Bodoland Territorial Council, a body created under the Indian constitution to safeguard the distinct cultural identity of the Bodo people of Kokrajhar and nearby districts. IJU has urged BPF, as a body enjoying the guarantees of the Indian constitution, to be more respectful of the laws of the land regarding the right to free speech. IFJ endorsed this call.

BPF was allegedly reacting to a report that appeared in the February 24 edition of Asomiya Protidin, on an extravagant wedding ceremony held the previous day for its leader, Hagrama Mohilary. As a public figure holding a constitutional office, IFJ wanted to remind Mohilary, that he should be prepared to subject himself to media scrutiny in matters otherwise deemed personal.

IFJ called upon the Bodoland Territorial Council and the Assam state government, in which BPF is a partner, to promptly condemn this attack on media freedom and bring those responsible to book.

As elected bodies functioning under a constitutional dispensation, IFJ urged the Bodoland Territorial Council and the Assam state government to disassociate themselves from any “ban” on the circulation of the Asomiya Protidin newspaper.

“India has established grievance settlement processes in matters involving the press”, said Jacqueline Park, Director, IFJ Asia-Pacific. “Aggrieved individuals are at liberty to approach the Press Council of India or if warranted, the courts of law for redress, and not resort to armed vigilantism”.