The commercial empire of tycoon Gautam Adani is suing independent Indian journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta in six different courts; he is not permitted to comment about the company or its owner.
The US investment firm Hindenburg Research, whose explosive report on Adani Group last month set off a stock meltdown that reduced the value of the company by $120 billion, said that the corporation had long utilised the fear of legal action to shield itself from closer examination.
As a short-seller, Hindenburg not only monitors corporate misbehaviour but also generates money by placing bets on declining stock prices.
The ports-to-power conglomerate, which operates all over the world, was charged with accounting fraud and stock manipulation, and it was further stated that "investors, media, citizens, and even politicians have been hesitant to speak out for fear of retaliation."
After producing a number of reports on Adani that included charges a high-ranking court gave it preferential treatment, Thakurta, 67, was faced with six defamation proceedings, three of them criminal.
Thakurta is prohibited by a court injunction from discussing Adani Group or its owner in writing or speaking.— AFP/file
Thakurta is not permitted to write or speak negatively about Adani Group or its owner due to a court order.
the AFP/file
If found guilty, he faces jail time and is forbidden from writing or speaking negatively about the company or its owner by a court order.
He informed AFP that "a gag order was placed on me." "I was informed that I was unable to remark on Mr. Gautam Adani's and his corporate conglomerate's operations. I don't want to disrespect the court, so."
The burden of paying legal fees and travelling to hearings in three states, according to his colleague Abir Dasgupta, who has been the target of three defamation lawsuits, "takes a toll on us physically and mentally."
"It consumes our time, has an impact on our families, and has resulted in time loss and economic loss for all of us."
Once Hindenburg made its claims last month, Adani Group immediately began to do damage control.
According to the short-research, seller's the conglomerate used related-party transactions carried out through tax havens to artificially boost its market value.
The firm's billionaire founder, who had previously been Asia's richest man, fell in the global rich-list rankings as a result of the stock market reaction, albeit shares in the group's listed firms have since stabilised.
The business has vowed to sue Hindenburg and refutes the allegations.
Moreover, it has filed a lawsuit in Australia against environmental activist Ben Pennings, saying that his campaign against the company's coal mining operation in Queensland cost them millions of dollars.
An Adani subsidiary has filed criminal defamation lawsuits against two journalists from the channel CNBC TV18, alleging them of publishing "grossly nasty, defamatory, and misleading" news reports.
Adani Group, like all businesses, "retains the right to defend itself against defamatory, misleading, or false remarks," a conglomerate representative told AFP. "Adani Group believes strongly in the freedom of the press.
"Adani has previously used those privileges on occasion. The group has always complied with all relevant legislation."
The claims of "financial terrorism" made news around the world, while many Indian media sources ignored, discounted, or criticised the authors.
One television panellist referred to Hindenburg's report as an act of "financial terrorism" against the nation, echoing the claim made by Adani Group that it was an intentional "attack on India."
Opposition MPs claim that the link between the founder of the business and Prime Minister Narendra Modi has benefited both parties.
Opponents claim the intimate ties between the two men are reflected in the Indian media's reluctance to look into the Adani charges.
The connection between the Modi and Adani stories, according to journalist Manisha Pande of Newslaundry, a website recognised for critical analysis of India's media environment, "has a lot to do with it."
Despite the over 400 television news networks in India, Modi's administration typically receives overwhelmingly favourable coverage.
Pande claimed that the Hindenburg report was "viewed as an attack not merely on a corporate firm, but also on Modi, his choice, and his tenure."
'Subservient'
After buying the broadcaster NDTV in December, one of the few media institutions renowned for openly criticising India's prime minister, Adani became a media mogul himself.
Tycoon dismissed concerns about press freedom and advised journalists to have the "courage" to speak out "when the government is doing the right thing every day."
One of NDTV's most well-liked anchors quit just hours after Adani took control.
The purchase, according to Ravish Kumar, a vociferous critic of Modi, was made with the intention of putting down opposition.
According to him, "Adani does not in any way encourage inquiry or criticism."
According to Thakurta, many Indian businessmen have invested in media organisations to "block out viewpoints and information that does not favour them."
He claimed that the media in India served as a "nexus" between private and public authority.
It shouldn't be shocking that such a sizable portion of Indian media is obedient to corporate interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment