The freedom of speech and expression is the most basic of
all freedoms granted to its citizens by a democratic nation.However,the degrees
to which restrictions are put on the right to free expression vary from one
country to another.The western nations,by and large,consider freedom of
expression as an absolute right against which no restriction is deemed
appropriate.On the contrary,India,by the first amendment of 1951,sought to
impose reasonable restrictions on free speech as mandated by the article
19(2)of the Indian constitution.The statutory provisions pertaining to the
limits on freedom of speech and expression is also dealt with by Article
153,Article 295 and Article 295-A of the Indian Penal Code(IPC).
Despite the umpteen number of laws that deals with freedom
of expression,there are numerous instances alleging the violation of individual
freedom and collective sentiments that crop up time and again in Indian social,
political, cultural and legal discourse.They either take the form of violent
street protests or extreme cases of physical violence as was exemplified by the
murder of Narendra Dabholkar for his concerted movement against
superstition.The recent case pertains to the protest against the book authored
by Perumal Murugan,who then vowed to keep himself away from writing in future.Simultaneouly,in France,there has been public outcry against the perpetrators
of Charlie Hebdo incident.
All these cases boils down to an important fact as to where
is the red line between freedom of expression and the right to get offended.It
is a truism that the tolerance level of society is gradually waning.Contrary to
the popular perception that India is a maturing democracy,the growing levels of
general intolerance among people has undermined the democratic spirit of our
nation.For instance,recently some right wing elements staged undue
demonstrations against a book authored by Perumal Murugan.The silence of the
writer in the aftermath of demonstrations implies that the state government and
the administration failed to protect the constitutional right of the individual
in upholding his right to free speech.
The progress of a civilization means the evolution from
barbarianism to intellectualism.The evolution towards a civilized society is
possible only if people become tolerant to the critics.Indeed,critique is a movement by which the subject gives itself the right to question truth on its effects of power and to question power on its discourses of truth.No societal progress
takes place without emotional violence with benevolent intentions.When
scientist first broke the news that it was bacteria that caused communicable
diseases instead of the punishment inflicted by angry Gods,people were hurt
emotionally but it was a necessary development in the larger interests of the
society.If people are offended,they have their right to disagree but on the
same ideological plane.Countering an offensive view by taking to the streets or
with the barrel of a gun does not bode well for the democratic traditions of a
society.
However,in a multicultural society like India,the challenge
is to strike a balance between protecting the individual freedom and respecting
the collective sentiments of a group or sect.India is a nation of diversity.The
coexistence of cultural groups amicably can happen only when there is agreement
between the various cultural groups at the social level.The legal measures to
curb hate speech are necessary but not sufficient condition for the harmonious
existence of different socio-cultural groups.What is important is to foster
greater understanding and tolerance for resecting the diversity that India is
endowed with.
The right to freedom of expression is a part of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it is protected by the Indian constitution.
ReplyDeleteIn the name of religious sentiments,an attempt is made to prevent the emergence of society that can think and act for itself.In the Tamil epic 'Shilapattikaram',Kovalan marries Kannagi in a simple ceremony without the use of Mangalsutra or 'thali'.
ReplyDelete