NEW DELHI: Even as the Government has decided to give self-regulation of television channels a chance, the Delhi High Court has asked the union government to constitute a statutory regulatory body for the electronic media.

The bench led by Justice Pradeep Nandrajog rejected the idea of self-regulation of the broadcasters. The directive came on a public interest litigation filed against ?Emotional Atyachar? show on UTV Bindass in 2010.

"Absence of state intervention on its own is no guarantee of a rich media environment. On the contrary: to promote a media environment characterized by pluralism and diversity, State intervention is necessary," the Court said.

Noting that freedom of expression was not an absolute right, the bench said any reasonable restrictions could be imposed only by legislation.

The Court in its judgment ruled that state intervention is necessary to promote the media environment that is characterised by pluralism and diversity. The Court added that a regulatory body was required for ensuring compliance of the provisions mentioned under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 and the Cable Television Network Rules 1994 by the media organisations.

The court recommended setting up a statutory regulatory body that would comprise of men and women of eminence from field of law, science, art and culture, literature, history and social sciences to be constituted. Security of tenure needs to be brought into practice for the members of the regulatory body to ensure non-interference from the government.

The court also directed that the Broadcasting Consumers Complaint Committee (BCCC), the self-regulatory body of the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), to look into the complaints of violation of programme and advertising codes and other provisions by the media and give its rulings, until the Government sets up a statutory body.

The court also ruled that the decisions of the BCCC shall be treated as the foundation stone for taking appropriate action against the offenders. It also asked the BCCC to decide the complaints of "vulgarity" and "obscenity" against the reality show ?Emotional Atyachar?, and the Centre would enforce the decision.

It said there was a desperate rush to grab eyeballs which had led the broadcast media to sully itself with sensationalism by adding colour and spice to events and transgressing individual privacy.

"To guarantee pluralism and diversity of opinion requires provisions for public broadcasting, commercial broadcast and print media and community-based broadcast. To ensure media pluralism may require the application of competition law by the State to prevent monopoly of forms of communications, airwaves etc.," the bench said.