7 rules for journalists when decoding a rape chargesheet
Confronted with lengthy court documents, journalists can sometimes lose sight of what they should prioritise
The bare facts are sobering: most victims of sexual violence in India do not get justice, with approximately only one in four rape cases ending in conviction. But what can the media do about this? The answer lies in a much-quoted aphorism: “Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done.” So, while justice may be blind, it is the job of journalists to ensure that the public is not left in the dark— they have a right to know what the facts of a case are and how the courts are dispensing justice.
The next question: from where do we get the facts of a case? The answer: chargesheet. This document, which outlines the charges against the accused, is filed by the police after their investigation of the victim’s complaint (which takes the form of a First Information Report or FIR). It is submitted to the court, which decides whether the police have gathered sufficient prima facie evidence to put the accused on trial.
Lawyer Ravi Garia, who practices at Delhi High Court, emphasises the importance of reporting on the basis of the chargesheet only once the court accepts it: “The chargesheet means that the police has investigated the case and found enough evidence to be convinced that a person can be tried in the court of law. But it’s upon the court to judge whether or not there is enough evidence for a trial. Therefore, it is the responsibility of journalists to avoid any presumptions or conclusions before that.”
Once the court decides a case can go to trial, the news media’s role is to make the public aware of the charges and to report on the course of justice. And it is often at this crucial juncture that journalists falter — confronted with lengthy court documents, they sometimes lose sight of what should be reported and how the information they have on hand can be interpreted and disseminated to the wider public.
Here is a short run-through of the points that journalists should take into consideration while deciphering rape chargesheets.
1. Don’t let your opinions colour your report
When reporting on the basis of a chargesheet, make sure you stick to the facts. Garia warns, “In a court of law we presume that any person who is under trial is innocent until and unless the charges against him/her are proven. Since the media affects the minds and hearts of the people in a direct manner, it should avoid its own conclusions based on moral judgements. This not only impacts the judicial proceedings but also may put a trust deficit between the people and the court of law.”
2. Think like the courts
Try to focus on the key aspects of cases that the courts take into consideration. The following four points are always noted by a court of law during a rape trial:
· The intention of the accused: The legal term for this is mens rea and refers to the perpetrator’s mental state when they committed the crime — for example, did they know they were committing rape or did they think they had consent? Were they impaired by intoxicants?
· Preparation to the action: Was the crime premeditated? For example, did the perpetrator arm himself? Did he make arrangements to hold the victim hostage?
· Insertion: This establishes whether the incident meets the legal criteria for rape.
· Was the act successful: Was a crime of intent completed?
Garia urges journalists to tread carefully and avoid any speculation regarding the accused’s guilt or innocence.
3. Focus on the evidence
Important evidence such as the outcome of the medical examination of the victim and forensic conclusions (semen on the victim’s clothing etc) should be clearly mentioned.
4. Look at different angles for balanced reporting
The chargesheet contains statements by the victim, the accused and witnesses (if any) — all of these should be reported (even if edited for brevity). This is important, as when a case is sub judice and guilt has not yet been established, the reporting of it must be fair and balanced.
5. Highlight the charges faced by the accused
A special emphasis should be given to the provisions of law under which the accused is charged, and what the usual sentence for each charge is. The court of law penalises a perpetrator solely on the basis of evidence and with the due charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Highlighting charges in a report will create public awareness of judicial proceedings.
Vijay Tyagi, a fellow of the Legislative Assistants to Members of Parliament (LAMP), suggests ways in which the media can make the legal details of cases more relevant and memorable for the audience. One strategy, he says, is to highlight the gravity of charges by drawing comparisons with similar cases that garnered public and media attention. He adds that journalists could also invoke the Constitution to inform the public about fundamental rights affected by such offences.
6. Provide a step-by-step summary
Most chargesheets contain a mass of details that can be confusing to the average reader. The challenge for the journalist is to whittle down the case into a story that is easily understood by the public. The chargesheet should be summarised into a series of events — what happened, what was the background if any, how was the crime investigated, which charges were framed on the basis of evidence etc. This will help people understand exactly what has happened in the case and what is likely to happen in future.
7. Know what to leave out
Garia cautions journalists to be mindful of sensitive information in a chargesheet. “The anonymity of the victim should always be safeguarded. Also, certain materials are not intended for circulation in the public domain — say, graphic pictures or videos. They are only to be used before the court of law. There is no need for such materials to be distributed to a wider audience, and to do so is sensationalism.”
He adds, “When journalists sensationalise a report, or presume the conclusions, they ignore that there is a system which is working in a certain manner. When you do this, overlooking all other factors that could have happened in a particular case, you are doing nothing but thrusting more pressure on the judge and the judicial system. A recent example of this is the trial by media in the Tarun Tejpal case. The media’s sensationalisation of the police chargesheet and the steady stream of conjecture were largely undesirable.”
