Freedom of Speech and Expression
“Give me the liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely according to conscience above all liberties.”
-John Milton.
The freedom of expression is regarded s the first condition of liberty. But now-a-days questions are raised that is the freedom of speech absolute? Or there are some conditions when one’s freedom of expression is restricted? The many cases like Shalin Dhada case, Aseem Trivedi case throw a harsh light on India’s new Information Technology Act that governs electronic speech. Freedom of speech and expression means the right to express one’s own convictions and opinions freely by words of mouth, writing, painting and pictures or by any other modes. In modern time, it is widely accepted that the right to freedom of expression is the essence of the free society and it must be safeguarded at all times. But the question is ‘How far does it go?’ and ‘How far should it go?’Why the IT Act 66A is a big issue?
The section states that, “Any person who sends by means of computer resource or communication device any information that is grossly ‘offensive’ or has a ‘menacing character’ could be punished with imprisonment for a maximum term of 3 years, besides imposing appropriate fines.” |
| Renu Srinivas and Shaheen Dhadha |
Similar situation occurs on 23rd Nov 2012, when two men from Mumbai, K. V. Rao and Mayank had to spend 12 days behind the bars and even had to lose their jobs with Air India for allegedly posting offensive comments against some congress leaders on their Facebook ‘closed group.‘ There are several cases where people were arrested under this law for questioning.
 |
| K.V.rao And Mayank |
This law became a big issue because politicians have used their power arbitrarily to shut the public mouth when they are against them. Now center has produced new guide lines for this act that with permission of DCP level officer in rural areas & urban areas and IG level officer in metros there should be no arrest under this act. But the question rises if inspector level officer cannot understand this law properly then how can the common man be?
Under 66 A, on social media there will be no debate can be possible because every debate turns out in result to annoy someone.
According to Com Score, a company that measures internet trends, India is the fastest growing online market in the last 12 months among BRIC nation. There were 44.5 million unique visitors. That is growth of 44% in one year
Pranesh-Prakash, the director of the center for Internet and society, says it’s a poorly drafted catchall. Under such sweeping status, Prakash says, 95% of India’s Internet users could be imprisoned. “I have 3500 followers on twitter and I’m pretty sure I annoy 100 of them on a daily basis”, he adds.
Article 19 (1A) of constitution of India declares that citizens have the right of freedom of speech and expression with ‘Reasonable restriction’ on the exercise of right. If there are given neat description of limits in clause 2 of 19(A) and a penal code was also there, then is there any need of this Act?
Is government so scared about something that they can’t control? If government is worried about being liable, there are laws for being liable. If government is worried about defamation, hate, crimes, communal violence, then there are laws for this. So why do we have such type of IT Act, Which goes beyond what constitution has.
Does Hate Speeches lead to bad acts?
Is hate speech undergoing unbalanced makeover? The current issue of Akbaruddin Owaisi speech throws a light on this issue. On 24 Dec 2012, he gave religious speech which is highly provocative and might lead to clashes between Hindus and Muslims. This raises the question that is there any limit on freedom of speech. Speech or other communication that incites hatred, particularly on grounds of race and religion and effectively threatens the rights of its victims is a criminal offence in the laws of number of countries. This is because hate speeches first of all denies recognition of the ‘inherent humanity’ of all human beings and their ‘equal and inalienable rights.’ |
| Akabaruddin Owisi speech at Adilabad |
 |
| Raj Thakre |
 |
| Varun Gandhi |
Raj Thakre commented on Biharis that speech invites very much violence. Varun Gandhi in 2009 gave a hate speech for which court in Pilibhit district of UP frame charges against him. A magistrate’s court convicted Samajwadi Parti leader Abu Asim Azami for a provocative speech he made in 2000.
 |
| Abu Azami |
What the narrow minded leaders do? They are playing the politics of intolerance. First they make the people insecure, and then they play on insecurity and by doing so they become defenders or champions of that particular society.
What can change though is the way we deal with such fundamentalist forces? One should exercise restraint while depicting religious figures that were the part of larger religious identity because in this part of the world we are more deeply rooted in religion. When your freedom of speech causes other people harm, you have to think twice. Of course, a balance
has to be struck between free speech, hate speech and defamation.
Is sedition law being misused?
“Tell the prince the truth, even if it offends him.”
-Confucius.
The above statement of Confucius is as valid as it ever was and it applies to potentially offensive forms such as cartoons, articles. The arrest of renowned cartoonist Aseem Trivedi in India on charges of sedition has triggered a wave of criticism across the country. Aseem Trivedi was arrested in Mumbai on the 9th December for cartoons that are said to mock the Indian Constitution. The history of the Indian cartoon is an example of the principle of purposeful disrespect in action. Freedom in a country is judged by the freedom cartoonists and journalists enjoyed. Because of the political pressure, now-a-days space of the cartoons is shrinking. Where has gone the editorial cartoons? |
| Arundhati Roy |
Five decades ago, the Indian Supreme court in Kedar Nath VS state of Bihar ruled that the crime of sedition requires ‘evidence of incitement to violence.’ Without the threat of violence, the law violates the constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression. Despite this prosecutors continue to mount charges without any proof. In above cases there is no violence or threat of violence occurred, so the question arises is sedition law being misused?
Suppression of voice of journalists:
On 19th Feb 2012, journalist Chandrika Rai with his wife and two teenage children were brutally murdered in their residence in Umria district, MP. He had been consistently writing against the illegal coal mining in the region and done a series alleging the involvement of a local BJP leader. Another similar case, Rajesh Sharma, editor of Hindi Weekly, Media Raj got killed in the state allegedly for publishing reports about supposed irregularity in schools. The table below shows the 2012 report.
There are many such cases in which the voice of journalist is suppressed. In free country like India we are unable to provide security to journalist and free writers.
Banning of Books in India:
Where India stands now…
India may be the world’s largest democracy but it fares abysmally poor in freedom index brought by 4 international institutes. According to Canada’s leading public policy Think-Tank Fraser Institute and Germany’s Liberals Institute, India “does very poorly” on safety and security — a key ingredient in maintaining personal freedom and a significant factor in economic growth. While India ranks 92nd among 123 countries ranked in the most complete index of human freedom yet available. India does particularly poor job on measurement of freedom of expression which creates a score based on freedom of speech, laws and regulation that influence media content, political pressure and controls on media content and dress code in public. India ranks 78 among 97 countries in guarantying access to all civil justice. The ‘Rule of law index 2012’ report by World Justice Projects provides country by country scores and ranking for eight areas of rule of laws.Is India getting too sensitive?
“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
-Voltaire.
Right to offend is the part of democracy. Societies who have confidence in themselves can accept offence as criticism and those who don’t are intolerant of criticism. We are society pretend to be mature. We are highly sensitive, highly insecure and constantly overreact. We have right to react through intellectual engagement, through debates, through articles but certainly not by physical assault. Problem that today governance has become completely to the idea of sentiment. If people are upset about something they are welcome to mobilize, they are welcome to take rally. Our right and duties go hand in hand.The most important task for each of us in India is to get involved in politics, in the sense of taking interest in how the state functions and undertaking actions small and large that will prod it towards better functioning. We have
traditionally felt that the greatest threat that we face is that of an apathetic citizenry. Many free writers write on internet anonymously, we want that India where no one is anonymous.
~Digvijay Sanjay Patil.
IIT- Kharagpur.
.jpg)
0 comments :
Post a Comment