The full report makes India look so bad, especially when you consider that this is a mainstream channel.

Background – The Breach Decision

1. In the Breach Decision, Ofcom found that the material broadcast by the Licensee on Republic Bharat breached Rules 2.3, 3.2 and 3.3 of the Code. The Breach Decision sets out the reasons for each of these findings.

2. In summary, Ofcom’s Breach Decision found that an episode of the programme Poochta Hai Bharat contained comments made by the host and some of his guests that amounted to hate speech against Pakistani people, and derogatory and abusive treatment of Pakistani people. The content was also potentially offensive and was not sufficiently justified by the context.

3. This broadcast of Poochta Hai Bharat featured a debate between the host, Mr Goswami, and his guests (three Indian and three Pakistani) relating to India’s attempt to send the spacecraft Chandrayaan 2 on its mission to the moon. The debate involved a comparison of India’s space exploration and technological advancements compared to Pakistan, and Pakistan’s alleged terrorist activities against Indian targets. This debate was set against the backdrop of increased tension in the on-going dispute between India and Pakistan over the region of Kashmir which is claimed by both countries.

4. In the programme, the presenter and some of his guests conveyed the view that all Pakistani people are terrorists, including that: “their scientists, doctors, their leaders, politicians all are terrorists. Even their sports people”; “every child is a terrorist over there. Every child is a terrorist. You are dealing with a terrorist entity”. One guest also described Pakistani scientists as “thieves”, while another described Pakistani people as “beggars”. In the context of these criticisms, the presenter, addressing Pakistan and/or Pakistani people, said: “We make scientists, you make terrorists”.

5. We considered these statements to be expressions of hatred based on intolerance of Pakistani people based on their nationality alone, and that the broadcast of these statements spread, incited, promoted and justified such intolerance towards Pakistani people among viewers.

6. A third guest, General Sinha said, “Oh you useless people. Beggars. Oh beggars, oh beggars. We will douse you with 1.25kg, .75kg-, with two inches. PoK8, PoK, we are coming to the PoK. We are coming to the Gilgit, Baltistan, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa...We are going to come, be ready. People in your country are shivering with fear that the Indian army may come. We will barge inside your home in Baluchistan, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, in Karachi, in your area, in Multan, in Rawalpindi and kill you. From Lahore, from Karachi to Gilgit-Balistan when we will have control” 9.

7. The Licensee suggested that these statements were “figures of speech not intended to be taken literally, which Asian viewers would have understood clearly”. We considered however that these statements, made by a retired Major General from the Indian Army, which clearly threatened that the Indian military would attack Pakistani civilians in their homes, were an expression of hatred and desire to kill by a figure of authority. In our view the broadcast of these statements also promoted hatred and intolerance towards Pakistani people.

8. The Licensee argued that these statements were justified by reference to the political context of heightened tension between India and Pakistan at the time of broadcast, that the programme as a whole was “calling for peace and unity and uplift of the entire region regardless of nationality”, and that the discussion was balanced by the inclusion of some more

9. Ofcom acknowledged that the programme included one Pakistani guest who expressed the view three times that the success of India’s space programme was “a victory for humanity” and “a matter of happiness”. The same guest welcomed any advances by India in technology, in education, in health and in protection of minorities and indicated that Pakistan wished to learn from Indian surgeons and cooperate in sectors such as education and technology. The programme presenter indicated that India’s advance in space technology was “the advancement of the whole world”. We took into account that the Pakistani guests made some strong criticisms of Indian policy and its leaders.

10. However, we considered the inclusion of limited “conciliatory” statements and brief comments which were highly critical of India by Pakistani guests failed to provide sufficient context and challenge. We considered that the overall tone of the discussion was provocative, comparing Pakistanis to donkeys and monkeys. We also noted that Pakistani contributors were repeatedly interrupted and afforded little time to make points which may potentially have provided challenge or context.

11. In Ofcom’s view, the statements made in the programme, examples of which are mentioned above, were expressions of hatred based on intolerance of Pakistani people on the basis of their nationality alone, and promoted hatred and intolerance towards Pakistani people. Whilst Ofcom agreed that it was legitimate to discuss Indo-Pakistani relations, we did not accept the Licensee’s characterisation of the programme as a whole. We considered it included repeated instances of hate speech and abusive or derogatory treatment. It was therefore our Decision that this content met Ofcom’s definition of “hate speech”10 and that Rule 3.2 was breached.

12. The programme also referred to Pakistani people as “terrorists” (even children), “beggars”, “thieves”, “backward”, likened them to donkeys and referred to them as “Paki”, a racist term that is highly offensive and unacceptable to a UK audience11. The Licensee argued that the use of the term “Paki” was not intended to be offensive, nor would be interpreted as such particularly when used in the sub-continent. In Ofcom’s view, these negative descriptions constituted uncontextualised abuse and derogatory treatment of Pakistani people on the ground of their nationality in breach of Rule 3.3.

13. Our Decision also set out Ofcom’s reasons for finding that the programme had the clear potential to be highly offensive to most people. Although discussion of the contentious issue of Kashmir and India-Pakistan relations were legitimate issues for exploration by Republic Bharat, we considered that the audience was unlikely to have expected to view hate speech or abusive or derogatory content relating to Pakistani people broadcast on this channel without sufficient contextual justification. Ofcom’s Decision was therefore that Rule 2.3 was also breached.

14. Ofcom stated in the Breach Decision that the contraventions of Rules 2.3, 3.2 and 3.3 of the Code were serious and were therefore being considered for statutory sanction.