Topics including the training of law reporters, the divide between social and institutional media, and of course, press freedom were canvassed at an online event to launch a new report on Indian media law.

An initiative of the World Editors Forum's South Asia chapter, WAN-Ifra's Media Laws in India analyses Indian laws that journalists should be aware of, and will be followed by training sessions later this month.

India's 70-year-old Constitution, said to be one of the largest in the world but without mention of freedom of the press - although freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed - was one topic discussed. Geeta Ramaseshan, a High Court lawyer from Chennai, said that there was a view that the powers of Article 32 should be made available to lesser courts. "However, some think, and I am among them, that the Constitution should not be tinkered with at all," she said.

Things have changed over the years - asides "which would have been ignored get Tweeted now," she said - while WEF chapter chairman Mukund Padmanabhan remembered the days when one reporter would be briefed on the court's decision and expected to share it with colleagues.

He recalled days at The Hindu in Madras, where "after the judgment, they would call the Hindu reporter and brief him, in English, and he would render the judgment.

"I think there's an issue with languages and technical legal terms," he added. Mukund retired from the editorship of The Hindu last year, and is now professor of practice at the newly-established Krea University.

There's a difference of opinion on whether journalists who cover court should be specially qualified.

Legal correspondent at The Hindu R Krishnadas said that while some believed court reporters should have degree in law, even the system of accreditation was a way of the court expressing the need for accountability. Mukund added that while most journalists learned "on the job", getting a law degree could be a valuable career move.

"It is so central to an understanding of how government worked that, if there's one subject for general journalism, law was half a step in the door," he said.

Moving to digital giants and social media, while Cass Sunstein's book #Republic "seemed fanciful", Facebook and Google "are modifying us," Mukund said, "and we need to be careful".

Krishnadas pointed to the wider use of Whatsapp, and the "huge blind trust" being placed in such platforms. WAN-Ifra's Elizabeth Shilpa pointed to the worsening positions of both India and Bangladesh in global press freedom charts. "So things are getting worse," she said.

Daily Star (Bangladesh) editor Mahfuz Anam agreed, pointing to "rise of the executive branch" and loss of some of the "checks and balances".

Geeta Ramaseshan said executors would "start the process of dealing with anyone they would want to see as an offender, just so that one can control.

"In many regions, with the smaller media, you can arm-twist to such an extent that there will be a conspiracy of silence. They are very successful in creating the element of fear."

A right to press freedom might have symbolic power, Mukund said, "but not because it would change anything, just that you could turn to it immediately". And self-regulation, he says, has not been entirely successful "but regulation from outside would be worse".

• Geeta Ramaseshan leads a two-day WAN-Ifra workshop on India's media laws later this month (November 16-17).

By way of example, she points to the situation where someone charged with sedition could also be prosecuted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and someone can be charged with both defamation and obscenity.

The two-day programme:

Day 1, November 16, covers:

The right to freedom of expression guaranteed under the Indian Constitution - with an understanding of "reasonable restriction" - Sedition frequently used to file cases against individuals and media; and the offence of outraging religious feelings, where discussions will focus on the understanding of the law and its application in taking away the freedom guaranteed under the Constitution.

Day 2, November 17, will cover:

Defamation - including discussion of the rights of an individual to file a case; defences available; and the issue of sanction of prosecution that makes public servants immune from attending court hearings, including a discussion of the classic case relating to the late M. F Hussain; and the Contempt of Court Act in which the court is the prosecutor, much in focus due to the prosecution of advocate Prashant Bhusan. The issue of sub judice and trial by media will also be discussed.

Trainer Geeta Ramaseshan has been a consultant to UNICEF and UNDP and is a guest faculty at the Asian College of Journalism, Chennai, where she teaches media law. More details here.

Peter Coleman

Pictured (clockwise from top left): Mukund Padmanabhan, Elizabeth Shilpa, R Krishnadas, and Geeta Ramaseshan