Freedom of expression v/s Charlie Hebdo

The gruesome attack on French satirical publication Charlie Hebdo by the terrorists has shocked not only France but the entire world.It was a barbaric crime and a despicable act of cowardice by the fundamentalist groups.France,a country known for revolutionizing the idea of ‘liberty,equality and fraternity’since the French revolution in 1789 suddenly found its cherished ideal of ‘liberty’ being challenged by fringe elements.It was an assault on freedom of speech and expression.The gruesome act of terrorism cannot be justified in any manner.

However,freedom of expression is not an absolute right.That said,the right to free speech doesn’t give the exclusive right to offend someone on an extremely sensitive issue like religion.In a liberal nation like France,where people are largely tolerant,it is not easy to draw a red line between freedom of expression and the right to offend an individual or group.It is because France has refrained from banning hate speech and left it to society to discourage it politically and morally.In such a liberal ambience,a democratic nation like France comprising a considerable minority population, would do well to uphold religion as a private affair.

There are subtle differences between merely critiquing a religion and ridiculing a religion.To be critical of a religion is warranted as it attempts to expose the truths in a religion thus broadening the minds of the people in a contemporary world.However,ridiculing a religion has no place in a civilized society as it hurts the sentiments of an individual or larger group.The problem with the ongoing discussion of Charlie Hebdo is that it tends to confuse blasphemy with bigotry.The cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo,in my view,were bigoted rather than blasphemous.This in anyway doesn’t justify the physical violence as gruesome as the attack on group of journalists of Charlie Hebdo.

It is significant to note that in many western countries,there are laws against blasphemy.But these laws are restricted only to official christian denominations.For example.Britain has strict provisions against blasphemy pertaining to Christianity,but there is no legal ban on blasphemy against other religions like Hinduism and Islam.When a nation claims to be secular,every religion must be treated equally.In an increasingly globalised world of today,it is pertinent to treat everyone and every religion with equal respect.

In India,freedom of speech and expression comes with ‘reasonable restrictions’as guaranteed by article 19(2) of Indian constitution.These restrictions are meant to safeguard the sovereignty and integrity of India,security of the state,public order,friendly relations with a foreign country,decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court,defamation or incitement to an offence.The most important statutory provisions under the ambit of article 19(2) are section 153,section 295 and section 295A of Indian Penal Code(IPC).The IT act is a relatively new law to regulate free speech on internet.As most of the provisions in these acts are subjectively defined,it leaves much scope for varied interpretations.In this context,freedom of expression often comes in conflict with the legal provisions.