The Central Government issued notices to Paytm and Reliance Jio, for their ‘unauthorised use’ of PM Narendra Modi’s image to advertise their products, Economic Times reported.
An official with the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution added that the companies may also face penalties in the coming week.
The Department of Consumer Affairs advised the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to “sensitise the media” on their need to obtain “prior permission” before commercial usage of specific emblems and names prohibited by The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.
Issue Behind the Ads
The day after demonetisation was announced on 9 November, Paytm launched a cover page advertisement urging the public to use their digital wallet service with a picture of PM Modi on it.
The government's decision to demonetise Rs 500 and Rs 1000 currencies benefits digital wallet firms like Paytm, and their image and services were also boosted by the government's direct campaign to promote cashless transactions.
But the image of the Prime Minister in the advertisements caused a massive debate amongst the public leading to a Public Interest Litigation.
Similarly, Reliance Jio also used the PM’s image, claiming it was furthering the government’s move towards a ‘Digital India’.
Legal experts however, weighed in on the issue and on the government’s delayed reactions.
Certainly, private entities cannot use official emblems and insignia without permission. It is strange that this government is waking up after so long since this has been going on for monthsAbhishek Manu Singhvi, Supreme Court Lawyer
What the Act Says
The 1950 Act states that “...No person shall, except in such cases and under such conditions as may be prescribed by the Central Government use...for the purpose of any trade, business, calling or profession...any name or emblem specified in the Schedule or, any colourable imitation thereof without the previous permission of the Central Government or of such officer of Government as may be authorised in this behalf by the Central Government.”
A lawyer from a major law firm held a stronger view that it was unconstitutional for a brand to use sitting politicians as brand ambassadors, which is what these advertisements amounted to.
“It might be alright for a public servant to promote a concept such as increase of education or sanitation, but not bind it with a specific brand.”
(Source: Economic Times)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)