PIL in Madras HC aims to protect pilots from defamatory media coverage

Following a surge in speculative stories by media houses regarding the Air India Flight 171 Boeing Dreamliner air crash in Ahmedabad on last month, advocate M Pravin has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Madras High Court.

The petition aims to tackle the increasing issue of defamatory and unverified media reporting targeting pilots and aviation professionals, seeking to protect their reputation and "ensure responsible journalism".

Institutional safeguards

The petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, urges the court to direct the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MCA), the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to establish institutional safeguards to prevent premature and unverified media narratives following aviation accidents.

Also read | Fuel cut in 1 sec? AI-171’s final minutes flag mechanical failure, not pilot error

The PIL stems from a growing trend of media outlets and digital platforms attributing fault to pilots in the aftermath of aviation incidents, often before official investigations are complete.

A notable instance cited in the petition is the tragic aviation accident on June 12, which claimed the lives of two pilots apart from around 260 passengers and those on the ground.

Reputation tarnished

According to the petitioner, speculative media reports emerged almost immediately after the Ahmedabad air crash, tarnishing the reputation of the deceased pilots and causing emotional distress to their families.

Such practices, the petition argues, not only violate the fundamental rights to dignity and privacy under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution but also undermine public trust in the aviation safety system and the integrity of official investigations.

Pravin, a resident of Coimbatore and a practicing lawyer, highlighted in his affidavit that this issue is not isolated but part of a recurring pattern. He noted that media houses, social media platforms, and digital intermediaries frequently publish unverified content that prejudges pilots, disregarding the principle of presumption of innocence.

Also read | What India, and the world, can learn from AI-171 Dreamliner crash report

The petition emphasises that such reporting can irreparably damage the professional standing and mental well-being of aviation professionals, particularly in cases where pilots lose their lives, leaving their families to grapple with both grief and reputational harm.

Key demands of the PIL

The PIL seeks a writ of mandamus on these lines:

a) The MCA and DGCA should issue advisories to media houses and aviation stakeholders to refrain from attributing fault or publishing speculative content until official investigation findings are released

b) There should be protocols to maintain confidentiality regarding pilot identities and preliminary investigation findings during ongoing inquiries

c) A formal mechanism should be created for responsible and verified public communication regarding aviation accidents

d) MeitY should issue guidelines under the IT Rules, 2021, instructing online platforms to refrain from publishing unverified or defamatory content and to promptly remove such content when reported

e) There should be collaboration among the respondents to develop specialised content moderation frameworks for sensitive incidents involving professionals under scrutiny

These measures are essential to protect the dignity and rights of aviation professionals, preserve the integrity of investigative processes, and foster a media environment rooted in ethics and accountability, the PIL says.

Broader implications

The petition underscores the broader implications of unchecked media reporting. It argues that speculative narratives not only harm individual pilots but also erode public confidence in the aviation safety ecosystem.

"Under the guise of press freedom, numerous Western media outlets publish misleading reports targeting Indian aviation professionals, which is unjust. We are filing another case to challenge their inaccurate reporting," noted Pravin.