Sedition and Arundhati Roy
Date : 21 Oct.2010
Place: New Delhi
Occasion : “Azadi – The Only Way” Convention.
Person involved: Arundhati Roy (and other lesser mortals)
Statement: "Kashmir has never been an integral part of India"
Crime : Sedition
Response: All hell breaks loose!
Flashback 1:
Player – Chief Minister of J&K Mr Omar Abdulla
Statement: “Kashmir had only acceded to, and not merged with, the Indian Union.”
Crime : ??? (for BJP, it’s ‘sack Omar’ handle)
Response – silence, save BJP!
Flashback 2:
Year: 1922,
Occasion: sedition trial
Person involved: Mahatma Gandhi
People’s response: Heroism to Gandhi.
Gandhi’s response: “Section 124 A, under which I am happily charged, is perhaps the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.”
One becomes a patriot; 88 years on, the other a villain!
Much ink was spilled in the aftermath of the “Azadi – The Only Way” Convention in New Delhi in which the Kashmiri hardliner Syed Ali Geelani, Booker Award winner Ms Arundhati Roy, and pro-Maoist leader Vara Vara Rao seemingly “made hate speeches.” If Newton is right, every action has equal and opposite reaction. And that is the direction almost all talk in India focused – freedom of speech and sedition.
Our Nationalist party –the BJP- was the first one to attack the government. Its spokeswoman, Nirmala Seetharaman was articulate when she attacked the government for looking the other side (courtesy: Arun Jaitley) when people were “speaking so much against the country and in such a tone, meaning to excite people who are working against this country." Her party does consider that our Constitution makes right to free speech a fundamental right! Speak. But “not so much!”
Thanks to the highly patriotic and vociferous BJP – all of a sudden we came to know a few things: 1) we are Indians. 2) There is something called controlled freedom of speech, and 3) sedition. They enriched our vocabulary and patriotic knowledge.
The BJP has this noble habit of getting miserably patriotic whenever it fits BJP’s “nationalist” convenience.
Never mind. What did Arundhati Roy say? At a convention –fully videographed and thoroughly scrutinsed by the Government of India- in New Delhi on 21 October 2010, she said from the dais, “Kashmir was historically not a part of India,” and she accused the India government of being a colonising power after independence.
Government was quick to play to the BJP’s pseudo-nationalist politics: it threatened to book Geelani and Arundhati Roy under section 124(A) of Indian Penal Code, for “sedition.”
Media lost no time in reading its own judgment, as it wont to do. Trial by media much before courts could step in. Except a few like The Hindu, www.thehoot.org, and English PEN, who wrote editorials and op-ed page articles vehemently defending Roy’s right to free speech and India’s democratic credentials, most -notably TV anchors- conducted high-ranking political debates getting some big mouths from various political parties. There was support to the accused, across the world, too, specially some websites from Pakistan highlighing Roys’ comments. And that is bad! Our hard core nationalists felt humiliated.
What do the accused say? “I have 90 FIRs registered against me already, this will be 91st,” scorned Geelani. Arundhati Roy wrote another masterpiece from Srinagar (Kashmir), defending her previous less read/ heard speech in New Delhi. Her writing skills were at her best, persuading readers and governments alike to love the country by meting out justice to state’s victims. She refuted the accusation against her for “giving 'hate-speeches', of wanting India to break up.” She turned the tables saying, “on the contrary, what I say comes from love and pride. It comes from not wanting people to be killed, raped, imprisoned or have their finger-nails pulled out in order to force them to say they are Indians. It comes from wanting to live in a society that is striving to be a just one. Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds. Pity the nation that needs to jail those who ask for justice, while communal killers, mass murderers, corporate scamsters, looters, rapists, and those who prey on the poorest of the poor, roam free.” And there is deafening silence all over! Even among the noted nationalists!
What do you say? That is the Constitution of India. You just can’t turn a blind eye to that. When Advani of Babri Masjid, Modi of Gujarat carnage, Sajjan Kumar of Sikh murders, Bal Thakeray of Mumbai riots, Sangh of Orissa and Mangalore mayhem are let free, wasn’t there any sedition or crimes against the State?
Government backtracked, silently and quietly (though a case is filed in Delhi on 1 November). The reasoning was that, arresting Roy and Geelani on sedition charges might give them more publicity and derail the ‘fragile peace process’ set in motion through the three interlocutors.
Now comes the question which many are asking, what is this sedition? Why has it making headlines? According Oxford dictionary, sedition is any conduct or speech inciting rebellion, specially against government. Section 124A of Indian Penal Code defines sedition as “whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India can be booked under sedition,” and can be sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment. The maximum punishment for sedition could be upto life imprisonment. In simple terms, sedition is an act of defiance against the state/ government. To ‘excite disaffection’, means to sow discontent or rebellion against government through speeches or some form of communication.
In his trial Mahatma Gandhi has clearly stated that if one had “no affection for a person or system, one should be free to give the fullest expression to his disaffection, so long as he does not contemplate, promote, or incite to violence.” That comes from the Father of Our Nation. One should be free to express one’s ‘disaffection’, and gag the speaker by booking under sedition! Here, Arundhati Roy’s statements have not created any unrest, rebellion, or violence against the state. So why interpret it as sedition?
The government does not consider it seditious someone peacefully making pro-independence speeches. But it has a problem with speeches made in an emotionally charged atmosphere of Kashmir, which it fears may lead to violence. Contrast that: during the general elections in 2008, Varun Gandhi declares to a charged mob, he would cut the hands of those who raise a finger against Hindus. Later, Lalu Prasad Yadav wants to run a road roller on his enemies. Many pseudo-patriot MLAs want to chase missionaries from Karnataka. None of these amount to sedition!
It has been a troublesome week for those who speak their minds freely. Unfortunately we have double standards governing our state and country. Advani, Uma Bharti, Kalyan Yadav and others’ hate speeches and criminal acts demolish a place of worship, create violence, and drive a deep communal wedge in the country which may need decades or even centuries to fill. Modi’s ghastly crimes frighten an entire state. Navin Patnaik and his saffron cronies go unpunished for their crimes against weakest of humanity. And yet none of them is punished. In stead, they enjoy power unlimited. So is the case with home-grown multi-millionaires. But a call for justice and peace by Arundhati Roy becomes sedition! It is unfortunate.
If at all what Arundhati Roy has said is unpalatable, political philosopher Voltaire can be our guide, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Today’s society has progressed much not only technologically and educationally that awareness of other individuals and groups of individuals cannot but hit our conscience. And when someone speaks for it, a state has a duty to respect and protect that freedom.
In many countries ‘sedition’ is an obsolete concept. For example, in Britain, from whom we have inherited this legal provision, the last completed trial in a sedition case was in 1947. The U.S. Supreme Court has rendered the sedition law toothless. In India too, courts are of the opinion that laws aiming to punish people for bringing a government into hatred or contempt are frighteningly broad. Hence, there is a risk of using them to suppress radical political views. It is high time that we did away with such anti-people laws.
Like the Mahatma, John Stuart Mill too, the champion of free speech, in his “On Liberty” enunciated a “harm principle.” For him the only justification for silencing a person against his will is to prevent him from causing harm to others. Meaning, the primary job of any government is to protect, and not suppress human rights.
About the Author:
Dr Richard Rego SJ is the Director of SARANG 107.8 FM Community Radio and Head & Assistant Professor, Department of Mass Communication (MCMS), St Aloysius College, Mangalore.
Comments
Add new comment