Professional Documents
Culture Documents
THE HINDU
OP-ED
Accusations of Nandy of being antiDalit/tribal/minority groups, the calls for registering a FIR against him, and demanding that he should be arrested would, in our better days, have been dismissed as an irrelevant, if not comic, aside. Such innocent days have faded, unfortunately, into a distant past. So quick are we now to take offence and demand immediate retributory action against alleged offenders that we almost never take a moment to pause, to ascertain the facts, understand what was said and meant, in what context, and to what ends. All we want is action, and now!
Three verdicts
Media plays a signicant role towards expansion of this freedom, and in the process, it also ghts and secures its own freedom. In India, we have an interesting checks and balances system owing from our rather detailed and legalistic Constitution which strenuously abjured oversimplication. If one arm fails, then some other arm of the society comes to the rescue. The process is not a simple, linear and easy one. It is a taxing, annoying and tiresome path that goes around in loops, and yet nally delivers. I am going to look at the role of judiciary, specically three high court judgments, in upholding the freedom of expression. The rst one gave journalists the right to engage a lawyer to represent them in cases before houses of elected representatives, the second gave theatre persons the right to stage plays without obtaining prior clearance from the police commissioner, and the third gave artists the right to express themselves in a manner that fulls their artistic dreams. Justice K. Chandru of the Madras High Court delivered the rst two judgments last week. The Court on January 21, 2013 directed the Privileges Committee of the Tamil Nadu Assembly to permit R. Gopal, Editor, Nakkheeran Publications, to be represented by an advocate, who will appear along with him in proceedings before the panel. Justice K. Chandru said, it was immaterial that the committees report was not nal and it was subject to the decision of the full House. That the proceedings might culminate in the deprivation of a citizens liberty, and Mr. Gopals apprehension that he would be unable to deal with the situation on his own and would require an advocates assistance was sufficient to say the committee could not deny counsels assistance. The presence of an advocate may actually help to dene what constitutes legislative privilege. Second, on January 23, 2013, Justice Chandru declared that Sections 2(1), 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the Tamil Nadu Dramatic Performance Act 1954 and Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Dramatic Performance Rules, 1955 are ultra vires and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. Journalist and theatre personality, Gnani, had challenged the Act, which mandated submitting two copies of the drama script to the police/district administration three weeks in advance and obtaining permission for the enactment. The Act had a punitive element too imprisonment for three months or ne or both in some cases for any violation. This judgment is a major relief to theatre persons. Way back in May 2008, the judgment by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul of the Delhi High Court, in the Maqbool Fida Husain case, became one of the nest expositions on freedom of expression in its multiple forms. His judgment concludes with an epilogue: A liberal tolerance of a different point of view causes no damage. It means only a greater self restraint. Diversity in expression of views whether in writings, paintings or visual media encourages debate. A debate should never shut out. I am right does not necessarily imply You are wrong. Our culture breeds tolerance both in thought and in actions. These are points where the practice and the principle meet in an emancipatory manner, and I hope this column contributes to this constant struggle to keep the boundaries of freedom expanding. readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
MISREADING THE CONVERSATION: The days when such an event would have been dismissed as irrelevant, if not comic, are now over. Instead, we want instant retributory action without pausing to ascertain the facts. PHOTO: ROHIT JAIN PARAS
lations. He went on to say, referring to both himself and Richard Sorabji, that if they arranged to get fellowships for their children at Harvard or Oxford, as part of a trade in mutual and selective favours, none will comment about that, as if it is axiomatic that the fellowship was awarded on the basis of merit. Politicians or leaders of the oppressed strata, being new to the game and relatively untutored in the skills of manipulation, are unlikely to seek academic fellowships as a form of graft, and are more likely to covet and corner licences to operate petrol pumps. These pumps are publicly noticeable and can provoke outrage. Their licensees are linked to their corrupt benefactors, who are then condemned by the chattering classes in metropolitan cities. So far so good. Nandy then went on to more provocatively stretch the argument, asserting that it is precisely this kind of corruption that has saved the Republic and democracy by enabling a degree of social and economic mobility and pluralising the composition of Indias elite. Furthermore, he argued, that it is most likely the list of corrupt could be inordinately dominated by Dalits, tribals, minorities and OBCs. Despite his prefacing his last remarks, saying that what he was about to say may shock many people, and that he nevertheless wished to stress the point about how we understand corruption, many in the audience (and one on the panel) completely missed Nandys point, and immediately accused him of casteist bias, calling upon him to withdraw his remarks and tender an apology. Some in the audience demanded that he should be charged under the Protection of Civil Rights Act for hurting the sentiments of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
Nandys protestations that what he said and meant was completely the opposite of what he was being charged with were not persuasive once the atmosphere was charged with heightened emotions. Competitive outrage, taking on the familiar form favoured by some overly strident and aggressive TV anchors, evidently gives no quarter to nuanced arguments, any irony, or even black humour. When Nandy characterised the former Chief Minister of Jharkhand, Madhu Koda (now in jail), as Indias rst dollar billionaire, he was hardly extolling the virtues of corruption or turning a blind eye to the perdies of upper caste politicians. At best, in an underhand and sly way, he was expressing admiration for the abilities of a tribal leader in matching up to what has hith(Harsh Sethi is Consulting Editor, erto been an exclusive preserve of InSeminar magazine.) dias upper caste elite.
kistani by belief and behaviour! Isnt it a point to ponder that the playing into Pak hands objection is never raised when an Indian Muslim organisation is under the scanner for home-grown terror? What is this if not the two-nation theory all over again? The BJP said as much when it reacted to Mr. Shindes statement thus: It is a downright insult of Indias spiritual, cultural and civilisational heritage In other words, if a Hindutva link is found to terror, then the nation is insulted. But obviously not when innocent Muslims are picked up, tortured and incarcerated as they have been in all the cases mentioned.
FOR A REBOUND: The emirate, recovering from a 2008-2010 corporate debt crisis and property market collapse, is eager to attract more foreign capital. PHOTO: AFP
the statement, and it was not clear how actively the new policy would be applied, or whether it might conict with the UAEs national regulations. The UAEs central government has for years been working on legislation that would in some cases let the cabinet approve 100 per cent foreign ownership in rms outside free zones. But Economy Minister Sultan bin Saeed al-Mansouri told Reuters this month that the draft law still needed to be debated by the Federal National Council, an advisory panel, and the cabinet. Foreign direct investment projects totalling $4.5 billion in capital spending were announced in Dubai during the rst half of last year, up seven per cent from a year earlier, according to official data. Reuters
TOO SKITTISH? While the Home Minister should have substantiated his accusations, reactions have been equally over the top, the trigger being an extremist elements comment. BJP members stage a protest at Jantar Mantar against Mr. Shindes remarks. PHOTO: PTI
terror groups stop midcourse because the results might help Pakistan? Will Pakistan decide how we deal with our internal problems? If the answer is yes, then, henceforth India must decide that all terrorists must necessarily be Muslim even if the evidence throws up Hindutva connections as it has indeed done in a host of blast cases, from Malegaon to Mecca Masjid to Samjhauta Express. India must resort to this dishonesty in order that we dont nd ourselves squirming under Pakistans accusing gaze. This is absurd logic and leads to the alarming conclusion that Pakistan will not object if the Indian terrorists are Muslim. And why so? Because Indian Muslims are Pa-
Legislation on ownership
Dubai, recovering from a 20082010 corporate debt crisis and property market collapse, is eager to lure more foreign capital. In one initiative announced early this month, the emirate said it would revise regulations to become a regional centre for Islamic nance and other Islamic businesses. Government officials could not be reached on Sunday to comment on
CM YK
ulative mode. Mr. Khan avoided direct accusations even on the Samjhauta Express blasts where Indian investigators have moved from blaming Pakistan to Hindutva groups: Pakistan has repeatedly said that we want a thorough investigation (into Samjhauta) and want Pakistans statement the investigation to be shared with PaSeveral questions arise: Is India going kistan, and whosoever are the perpetrato get all defensive and skittish each time tors or culprits should be punished in an extremist from across the border de- accordance with the law. Can anyone liberately makes a provocative com- quarrel with this perfectly reasonable ment? Why do we need to respond to response? Haz Saeed when official Pakistan has More importantly, consider the full reacted far more responsibly? Pakistans implications of pushing the line that adForeign Office spokesperson Moazzam mitting to Hindutva terror means scorKhan said: We being a responsible ing a self-goal vis--vis Pakistan. Should country do not want to get into spec- investigators on the trail of right-wing