LIBERTY & INSENSITIVITY OF OUR TIMES
Prof. S.N. Misra
The August issue of OPEN delectably titled “Are we Free to be Free”, has three riveting
articles from Swarpan Dasgupta, Shashi Tharoor and Shiv Vishanathan. Swarpan reminisces
about the troika of Jadunath Sarkar, Bhandarkar and Mahatma Gandhi to underscore the
importance of ‘character’ in nation building and eschewing individualism over
consensual national purpose that does not compromise basic freedoms. Jadunath openly
castigated the Congress as ‘white cap patriots’ and that “they will do more harm than good, if
allowed to form a government”. Bhandarkar was far more obsequious “It is no use ignoring
the fact that Europe is far ahead of us in all that constitutes civilization”. Gandhi was for
more prescient as he wrote in Hind Swaraj: “The English have not taken India: we have
given it to them”. Quite clearly, his Dandi March (1930) conveys the epoch of freedom, the
courage and defiance which enacts the alphabet of freedom and transformed an elitist
congregation into a mass movement. There is a certain salience that festoons them.
Shiv is at his prosaic best when he captures the three lampposts of India’s indelible freedom
memory viz. the Dandi March (1930). The Tryst with Destiny Speech (1947) and the Chipko
movement (1982). He calls the Tryst with Destiny speech, as the “promissory note of a
nation”- a pledge that is largely unfilled. Shiv’s resplendent prose is reserved for the women
of the Chipko Andolan hugging trees, Iron Sharmila battling AFSPA and a younger
generation protesting gang rape – emblematic of the fact that our tryst with destiny is still
possible. His observation that “India stands ethically immobilized between a
fundamentalist idea of development and an un-dialogic sense of tree” is truly epiphanic.
Shashi Tharoor, an inveterate champion of freedom of expression, is disconsolate about the
irresponsibility that shrouds social media today. He quotes Justice Oliver who said “freedom
of speech does not extend to the right to shout fire in a crowded theatre”, as it can lead to a
stampede and loss of life. Unlike regular media where your facts could be checked, vetted
and challenged, in social media you can click a mouse and watch it all go viral. Lies,
distortions and calumny go into cyberspace unchallenged; hatred, pornography and
slander are routinely aired. The line between legitimate creativity and disparaging content
gets severely blurred. All these writers bring to the table the crass individualism,
irresponsible freedom and wanton indifference that cramp our democracy.
There is often a contempt for ‘reasonable restrictions’. Unlike USA, UK & France, India does
not enjoy unfettered freedom of speech. The Constitution imposes a swathe of restrictions at
Art 19(2). Section 66A of IT Act which
frowned upon grossly offensive or
menacing material in internet has been
struck down by the Supreme Court in the
Shreya Singhal’s Case (2015). The judges
have called the section a “vice of
vagueness and chilling restriction on
freedom of expression”. The defenders
of unfettered liberty quote Article 19 of
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
which states “people have the right to
seek, receive and impart information
and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. Quite clearly Article 19(2)
limits these frontiers. The Shreya judgement could be seen an endorsement of Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Yet it’s a troubled terrain, that we must be wary of. Much
as we may celebrate artistic freedom, yet the cartoons of Prophet Mohammad can be as
deeply derogatory. Just as MF Hussain’s artistic celebration of a nude Saraswati or
lampooning the picture can be manifestly distasteful. As Justice Hidayatullah wrote in his
verdict in KA Abbas Vs. UOI Case; 1971 “Freedom of expression can’t and should not be
interpreted as a license for propagating shoddy, vulgar taste”.
The other area where the internet can be distressing for parents is child pornography. Even a
free spirited country like England established Internet Watch Foundation in 1996 which the
public can use to report illegal content. This has reduced a
total of 18% of child abuse cases coming down to 1%.
This is an area where debunking reasonable restriction
through a judicial sweep can be patently dangerous. In sharp
contrast icons like Sunderlal Bahuguna bring in whiff of
fresh air and take the debate on freedom to a more
responsible level. The marauding MNCs who give a fig leaf
to regulatory checks like the PESA Act while destroying
forests, are our poster boys of growth. On the contrary the
women who hug the trees to prevent such wanton venality
are called rebels. The battle of the Narmada survivors sitting
in silence as the water sculpts their feet; or a Sharmila being
force-fed shows how collective amnesia destroys freedom.
Laski was prophetic when he said “Eternal Vigilance is the
Price of Liberty”. Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Prize winner and holocaust survivor had said
“Indifference is the friend of the enemy”. While singing hosannas for growth and
unfettered liberty, we need to ponder over the contours of indifference and lurid insensitivity
that dot our democracy.
Joint Secretary (Retd.), Govt. of India
Presently Director, School of Leadership, KIIT University
Campus-4, Chintan Building, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024
Ph-07381109899
E.mail-misra.sn54@gmail.com