In every functioning democracy, the media is honoured as the fourth pillar, standing alongside the legislature, executive, and judiciary. This recognition, however, is often tested in practice—particularly when media organisations find themselves at the receiving end of systemic intimidation, financial strain, and legal persecution. What is troubling in recent times is not just the misuse of power to stifle the voice of the press, but the silence of institutions that are supposed to uphold justice and constitutional rights.
In today’s socio-political climate, the media is frequently treated as a tool—used, manipulated, or conveniently ignored by those in power. Be it government officials, political leaders, civil society organisations, or even underground armed groups, each stakeholder attempts to steer the media narrative for their own benefit. In a time when many media houses are struggling under financial pressures, the temptation or compulsion to yield to such forces is very real. Yet, there remain those few who, despite the odds, choose to stand firm—reporting the truth with courage and integrity, irrespective of the risks involved.
It is understandable when the media finds itself caught between underground groups or activist civil societies. These are expected adversities in regions marred by political and ethnic complexities. But what becomes deeply worrying—and unacceptable—is when media houses are intimidated by those occupying the highest echelons of government. The use of anti-social elements to threaten reporters or editors, followed by the weaponisation of legal notices and defamation suits when intimidation fails, reflects a disturbing descent into authoritarianism.
This trend flies in the face of the very idea of democracy and violates the legal principles enshrined in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2024, which clearly states that it is not defamation to impute anything that is true concerning a person, if it is for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. This provision protects responsible journalism and empowers the press to report on matters of public interest without fear of legal retribution—provided the report is based on truth and evidence.
It is in this context that the recent developments concerning Imphal Times raise urgent questions. The newspaper, known for its fearless reporting, has been served a legal notice demanding a staggering Rs.100 crore in damages. This comes at a time when it is already fighting multiple defamation cases, including one outside the state. The matter in question relates to its report on the violation of the Paddy Field and Wetland Protection (2nd Amendment) Act, 2021—a law designed to safeguard Manipur’s fragile ecosystem and agricultural land from unchecked urbanisation and misuse.
Instead of addressing the reported violations or initiating a credible investigation, the concerned government authorities have chosen silence. This apathy, or perhaps calculated inaction, suggests a preference for shielding wrongdoers rather than holding them accountable. Worse, it sends a chilling message to the journalistic community: report at your own risk, and prepare to be silenced.
When the government, be it an elected one or under President’s Rule, chooses not to act on credible media reports, it raises serious questions about the state of governance. What happens when every door for justice—be it the administration, the legal system, or the press—is either compromised or silenced? Who then remains to speak for the public interest?
The role of the media is not to make allegations blindly. Reputable media houses understand the consequences of publishing unverified information. No editor or reporter will risk the survival of their publication by resorting to false or baseless reporting. What they seek is accountability—both from those in power and from those who benefit unlawfully at the expense of the public and the environment.
It is time we ask: is governance merely about maintaining law and order, or does it include the courage to confront uncomfortable truths? Silence in the face of illegality is complicity. And when that silence becomes systemic, it turns democracy into an illusion.
If democracy is to be preserved and not reduced to symbolism, then the government—any government—must listen when the press speaks, investigate when laws are allegedly violated, and protect rather than persecute those who dare to hold up the mirror. The fourth pillar may stand alone today, but let it be known—it is still standing.