Is it possible for a quasi-judicial body like the Press Council of India (PCI) to survive for weeks without a chairperson? Should the world’s largest democracy set such an example, where a government-recognised autonomous media watchdog faces an existential crisis, with the 15th Council of the PCI still without a functioning head and 13 vacant seats? How can a press council continue to function without filling these 13 seats—meant to represent millions of media professionals—for more than a year, when the council’s term itself is limited to three years? Many such pertinent questions are now being raised by media professionals across the South Asian nation, as the regular three-year term (along with the permissible six-month extension) of the immediate past PCI chairperson, Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, came to an end on 16 December 2025.
Recently, a number of media associations urged the Union government in New Delhi to appoint a new chairperson for the PCI at the earliest. Moreover, this writer sent several official communications over the past few weeks seeking information on the current PCI team, but the PCI office has remained silent. It did not even offer the courtesy of a response. Until recently, the PCI’s official website (www.presscouncil.nic.in, currently non-functional) continued to state that Justice R.P. Desai, who assumed office on 17 June 2022, was still serving as chairperson. However, media reports suggest that the retired Supreme Court judge has already been appointed chairperson of the Eighth Pay Commission.
Adding to the confusion, the tenure of the 14th Council expired on 5 October 2024, and various initiatives to constitute the statutory 15th Council encountered multiple hurdles. At present, the PCI has the following functioning members: Sudhanshu Trivedi and Brij Lal (Rajya Sabha members); Sambit Patra, Naresh Mhaske and Kali Charan Munda (Lok Sabha members); Ashwini K. Mohapatra (University Grants Commission); Manan Kumar Mishra (Bar Council of India); K. Sreenivasarao (Sahitya Akademi); and Sudhir Kumar Panda, M.V. Shreyams Kumar, Gurinder Singh, Arun Kumar Tripathi, Braj Mohan Sharma and Arti Tripathi, who either own or are involved in the management of large, medium or small newspapers.
The 28-member PCI (excluding the chairperson), originally set up in 1966 under the Press Council Act, 1965, and later re-established in 1979 under the Press Council Act, 1978, was mandated to improve the standards of newspapers and news agencies in the billion-plus nation. Of these 28 members, 13 are meant to represent professional journalists—six editors and seven working journalists. However, these 13 seats continue to remain vacant.
The crisis began when several national journalists’ bodies opposed a change in PCI rules that sought to select members from various press clubs instead of recognised national unions of working journalists. Some organisations even approached the courts, further complicating the situation. They argue that press clubs are primarily recreational bodies, usually confined to specific regions, cities or towns. Often, press clubs grant membership to non-working journalists—such as academics, writers, film personalities and diplomats—to expand their influence, which may prevent them from adequately representing professional media personnel at critical junctures. More importantly, they contend that press clubs, press guilds or media clubs—despite nomenclature such as the Press Club of India—do not function as truly all-India representative bodies. In contrast, recognised journalist unions generally have memberships spread across different parts of the country.
As the PCI remains headless—an unprecedented situation in the history of this statutory body—the question inevitably arises: who is safeguarding India’s vast print media fraternity, comprising over 100,000 publications in multiple languages and frequencies, as registered with the Registrar of Newspapers for India? The PCI is empowered to receive complaints against newspapers, news agencies, editors or working journalists for professional misconduct that undermines journalistic standards. However, its powers to enforce guidelines and penalise erring publications or individuals remain limited.
Beyond print media, the country also hosts nearly 400 satellite news channels and millions of digital platforms, including news portals, WhatsApp-based outlets and other online media. None of these currently fall under the PCI’s jurisdiction. In effect, all modern, technology-driven news platforms remain outside its regulatory ambit. While the PCI does have the authority to make observations when the conduct of any government is found to be inappropriate, while safeguarding press freedom, demands are growing to bring television, radio and digital media under its jurisdiction and to strengthen its powers accordingly.
---
*Senior journalist based in Guwahati
Comments