Defence Ministry advisory: Refrain from live coverage of operations, security forces' movement
The Ministry of Defence on Friday issued an advisory to the media to refrain from showing live coverage of defence operations and movement of security forces.
In a post on its social media handle X, the Ministry said, "All media channels, digital platforms and individuals are advised to refrain from live coverage or real-time reporting of defence operations and movement of security forces."
The MoD said that the disclosure of such sensitive or source-based information may jeopardise operational effectiveness and endanger lives.
It also cited past incidents like the Kargil War, the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, and the Kandahar hijacking, which underscore the risks of premature reporting.
The Ministry said that as per clause 6(1)(p) of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021, only periodic briefings by designated officials are permitted during anti-terror operations.
"All stakeholders are urged to exercise vigilance, sensitivity, and responsibility in coverage, upholding the highest standards in the service of the nation," the MoD post said.
The Ministry also tagged an advisory of the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, which on April 6 had issued a detailed note.
The advisory to all media channels was to refrain from showing live coverage of defence operations and movement of security forces. It had listed some points of caution: In the interest of national security, all media platforms, news agencies, and social media users are advised to exercise utmost responsibility and adhere strictly to existing laws and regulations while reporting on matters concerning defence and other security-related operations.
It had also specified that no real-time coverage, dissemination of visuals, or reporting based on 'sources-based' information related to defence operations or movement should be undertaken.
"Premature disclosure of sensitive information may inadvertently assist hostile elements and endanger operational effectiveness and the safety of personnel. Past incidents have underscored the importance of responsible reporting. During events such as the Kargil war, the Mumbai terror attacks (26/11), and the Kandahar hijacking, unrestricted coverage had unintended adverse consequences on national interests," the advisory mentioned.
It said that the media, digital platforms, and individuals play a vital role in safeguarding national security.
"Apart from the legal obligations, it is a shared moral responsibility to ensure that our collective actions do not compromise ongoing operations or the security of our forces," the Ministry's advisory mentioned.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has already issued advisories to all TV channels to adhere to Rule 6(1)(p) of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021. Rule 6(1)(p) states, "No programme should be carried in the cable service which contains live coverage of any anti-terrorist operation by security forces, wherein media coverage shall be restricted to periodic briefing by an officer designated by the appropriate Government, till such operation concludes.'
The Ministry had said in its April 26 advisory, "Such telecast is in violation of Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021 and is liable for action thereunder. Therefore, all TV channels are advised not to telecast live coverage of anti-terrorist operations and movement by the security forces in the interest of national security. Media coverage may be restricted to periodic briefing by an officer designated by the appropriate Government till such operation concludes."
The government has requested all stakeholders to continue exercising vigilance, sensitivity, and responsibility in coverage, upholding the highest standards in the service of the nation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Ruckus in assembly over expunged remarks, 4 BJP MLAs suspended
1 2 3 Kolkata: Chaos broke out in the Bengal assembly on Monday after BJP lawmakers protested speaker Biman Banerjee's decision to expunge remarks made by them last week. An intense showdown between opposition and treasury benches led to marshals being called in to forcibly remove lawmakers from the House. Four BJP MLAs were suspended for the remainder of the assembly session. Tensions mounted when BJP MLA Ashok Lahiri raised a point of order asking why a speech made by him was expunged from the records. Last Thursday, BJP MLAs had raised questions about the West Bengal Sales Tax (Settlement of Dispute) (Amendment) Bill which was being discussed in the House. But when minister Chandrima Bhattacharya rose to answer those questions, BJP legislators staged a walkout. Later, speaker Banerjee decided to expunge the comments made by BJP lawmakers because they walked out before listening to the minister's response to the questions they had raised. On Monday, when Lahiri asked under which rule his remarks were expunged, a response by minister Bhattacharya triggered an uproar. Amid the commotion, Tilak Chakraborty, Trinamool MLA from Mahishadal, taunted BJP legislators by asking: "Who lost in Kaliganj?" The debate soon devolved into a shouting match. At one point, opposition legislators started moving towards the treasury benches. As tempers rose, speaker Banerjee called in marshals to remove some of the BJP lawmakers from the House. A melee ensued. BJP said its chief whip Shankar Ghosh fell on the ground while being restrained by security personnel and his spectacles broke and MLA Subrata (Kanchan) Maitra's watch suffered damage during the scuffle. Shortly after the incident, leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari, who was not present in the assembly during the melee, approached the speaker and in a dramatic face-off handed over the damaged spectacles and watch. He further alleged the marshals manhandled the MLAs and that he was personally targeted. "I left Shankar Ghosh and Shantanu Pramanik's spectacles and Subrata Maitra's watch with the speaker," Adhikari told reporters, adding, "And then the speaker said, 'remove the leader of opposition.' Is this the kind of language one expects from the chair?" Adhikari claimed he was surrounded by 20 female security personnel. "They wanted me to get into a physical altercation with the women. I kept my hands in my pockets and told them, 'You will have to push me out by force'. I stood there and continued my protest," he said. Speaking to reporters, speaker Banerjee said 14 security staffers were injured while they were trying to remove the lawmakers from the House. "This is unfortunate. Such things should not occur in a parliamentary democracy," he said. "I have asked the assembly secretariat to examine the report of injury to several staffers, report of damages to the spectacles and watch of BJP members and the damage to microphones. If the allegations are proved, we will recover the money from the salaries of legislators," he added. The speaker later announced suspensions of BJP MLAs Agnimitra Paul, Manoj Oraon, Deepak Barman and Shankar Ghosh for the remainder of the session. BJP said it will continue its protest on Tuesday, the last day of the session.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Ensure panel formed to curb unauthorised constructions meets once a month: HC
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed the Chief Secretary to ensure that the High-Level Monitoring Committee constituted to curb unauthorised constructions meets once a month and submits monthly reports to the government. A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete observed that the committee's functions must be periodically monitored by the government and any inaction must result in an appropriate action against the authority who failed to implement the G.O. and committed dereliction of duty. The efficient functioning of the committee was not made clear by the authorities, the court observed. It further observed that a holistic reading of the Act and the Rules covering urban and panchayat areas with regard to unauthorised constructions would be sufficient to form an opinion that building constructions must be undertaken only after obtaining building plan permission from the competent authorities as stipulated in the applicable provisions of the Act and the Rules. Regularisation, condonation or otherwise were only enabling provisions and must be granted exceptionally in deserving cases where an injustice had been caused. However, regularisation could not be claimed as an absolute right. The unauthorised and illegal constructions could not be regularised in a routine manner by the authorities, the court said. Unauthorised constructions posed a danger to the public and caused environmental damages. Greedy men were emboldened to construct buildings unauthorisedly in urban areas and rural areas, thereby causing inconvenience to neighbours and road-users. They converted fertile lands into a concrete jungle and deprived others of a peaceful living. Authorities failing in their duty to deal with unauthorised constructions must be subjected to departmental disciplinary proceedings, the court observed. The authorities were not expected to wait for complaints from anyone. They were duty bound to monitor construction activities. Field-level officials must ensure that buildings were constructed in accordance with the building plan permission and violations were to be dealt with in accordance with law swiftly. Violations must be identified at the initial stage of construction, which would prevent financial and other loss to all concerned. The court was hearing the petition filed by M. Daniel Simiyon Sudan, seeking a direction to the authorities to remove unauthorised construction/rice mill in Srirangam in Tiruchi district. The court directed the authorities to initiate enforcement action and demolish the constructions, if any identified, in eight weeks. The matter was posted for reporting compliance to August 7.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
FATF's Pak challenge: Tracing routes of funds
At one level it seems like a huge win for India. At least one major body has focused on the Pahalgam terror attack rather than the operation that followed it, and ensuing calls for restraint. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the foremost authority on money laundering and terrorist finance, has not just condemned the terror attack, but, last week, resolved to launch a probe noting that it could not have been carried out 'without money and the means to move funds between terrorist supporters'. Unlike various groups asking for proof of who did the attack, the FATF proposes to find it for itself. The Pulwama terror attack that killed 40 security personnel happened even as Islamabad was threatened with blacklisting. (Waseem Andrabi/HT) The FATF was formed in 1989 by the G-7 countries, the European Commission and eight others (who are not listed), to combat money laundering, including 'terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction'. Over the years, it steadily increased its mandate to include all manner of actors including narcotics networks. India joined in 2010, after a rigorous examination of its banking systems, a review which happens periodically to protect the global system from danger. In 2024, India again got an 'outstanding' report for its financial stability and probity, though the FATF warned about 'non-profit' associations being used for terrorist finance. A number of NGOs were shut down, causing a cry of illiberalism. Pakistan, on the other hand, was put on a 'grey list', which means its financial systems have significant deficiencies, three times: Once in 2008, and taken off the list in two years after some improvements; again in 2012 for not curbing terrorist financing among other things; and again in 2018 for the same reason. This time it kept it there until October 2022, during which period Islamabad sentenced Lashkar-e-Taiba leader Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi to five years imprisonment, Hafiz Saeed to 33 years in jail, and set in place legislation including an Anti-Terrorism Act (Amendment) Bill, 2020 which updated the legal definition of terrorism to international standards. A legislation was introduced to bring Pakistan's laws in line with the UN laws on terrorist financing, 20 years after Resolution 1373 had been enacted, and further gave the State Bank of Pakistan a degree of autonomy to implement much of this. That was when Imran Khan was in office, against an Opposition which feared their large unaccounted funds would come under scrutiny. Khan, who had a clean record on corruption, warned that going onto the 'black list' would mean an economic crash. A country on the black list is sealed off from the rest of the world in financial terms and faces serious difficulties in securing loans. At that time, Pakistan's external debt was 37.6% of GDP! But terrorism did not stop. The Pulwama terror attack that killed 40 security personnel happened even as Islamabad was threatened with blacklisting. It paused after India retaliated with air strikes deep inside Pakistan for the first time. Subsequently, government reports showed a significant drop in infiltration attempts from 216 incidents in 2019 to 53 in 2022 (according to MHA reports). But terrorist tactics simply shifted. Narcotics trafficking long associated with terrorism in Punjab returned. According to reports, some 251 transborder sorties by drones brought in weapons and drugs, this time mostly methamphetamine and derivatives from Lahore, even as underground tunnels were spotted along the international border. Second, terrorist groups became smaller in size but better trained and equipped. The personnel could live off the land for months in thick forests and were equipped with phones that evaded mobile towers. Then Pahalgam happened. As the FATF swoops in, two things matter. The first is whether our forces have managed to crack the communication system of terror groups to trace the source areas. That is vital. Second, Pakistan, despite the Taliban's crackdown on opium cultivation, seems to be able to access vast amounts of meth, as seen in the 300-kg seizure in April 2025 off the Gujarat coast. Pakistan also has money to continuously raise not just its defence budget — now far above the mandated 1.9% of its GDP when pensions are included — but also the pay of parliamentarians (by 138%) and defence personnel. Then, the FATF has to examine how Chinese funds are coming in to support the army, since none of it is evident in the budget papers. The FATF may also find other sources of financing, from outside the country. The sum of all this is to find out why Pakistan doesn't seem to care even if access to international financial assistance, crucial for it, is cut off. If Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's call for peace has some basis, he could start by emulating Indian initiatives like linking national identity cards with bank accounts, use its very capable investigative agencies to root out terrorist accounts, and those of 'charitable' organisations such as the highly suspect Al Khidmat Foundation. The army will, of course, oppose this. But major financial institutions must back the politicians, by linking aid with democracy. Otherwise nothing at all will move forward. Meanwhile, India had better look at hawala networks at home. Money has no nationality and no morals, and it could be used by hostile agencies as well. Time to get cracking for our own interests. Meanwhile, the Sharifs might actually find the going easier as terrorists are curtailed, and the army's powers with it. Tara Kartha is director (research), Centre for Land Warfare Studies. The views expressed are personal.
