The suspension of screening of the Hindi film Aarakshan, which deals with issues of caste and reservation, by the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, and Andhra Pradesh is a serious encroachment on the freedom of expression in the guise of upholding public order and respecting the sentiments of a social group or community. The director, Prakash Jha, has done well to challenge the ban before the Supreme Court of India, which will hear the case on Tuesday. Independent of the merits of the film, such a ban is out of place in a democratic society. It militates against the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Although clause (2) of the Article allows for reasonable restrictions on the freedom, including in the interest of public order, the Supreme Court has clearly laid down, in the 1989 judgment in the case of S. Rangarajan v. Jagjivan Ram involving the film Ore Oru Gramathile (which too dealt with the issue of reservation), that “freedom of expression cannot be suppressed on account of threat of demonstration and processions or threats of violence.” That, the court noted, would be tantamount to “negation of the rule of law and a surrender to blackmail and intimidation.” The competent authority for clearing a film for public release is the Central Board of Film Certification, and politicians and communal or sectarian pressure groups cannot arrogate to themselves the right to decide what films others should watch. Taking the easy or opportunist way out by banning a movie is anathema to any functioning democracy.
While it is in the nature of art to shock or provoke, in the case of Aarakshan the portions objected to do not even constitute the thrust of the movie. To tear out of the dramatic context snatches of dialogue and demand their removal from the film is to take intolerance to new heights. The issue is not whether an articulated argument is valid or not. As the Supreme Court noted in the watershed 1989 judgment, “The producer may project his own message which the others may not approve of. But he has a right to ‘think out' and put the counter-appeals to reason. It is a part of a democratic give-and-take to which no one could complain. The State cannot prevent open discussion and open expression, however hateful to its policies.” The real danger to the public interest springs not from the public screening of the movie, but from state-imposed restrictions on freedom of expression on indefensible grounds. Aarakshan must be allowed a free run as cleared by the CBFC without any cuts — in the interest of keeping India a free and open society. To give in to sectional interests in this case would be to put in jeopardy a cornerstone of the Indian Constitution.
Keywords: Aarakshan controversy, freedom of expression
Freedom of speech and expression guranteed by the Constituion of India has its own limitations, we often forget the precincts and believes that we enjoy complete freedom when it comes to speech and expression. We should respect every ones opinion, but we need to make sure that our opinions should not engender unrest in society. We often miss a simple logic when we talk about reservation. Reservations are meant for uplifting of poor and weaker sections not to surpress other sections. For thousands of years we restrained weaker sections from culture, edification, knowledge, power.... They tolerated our deeds for thousands of years, can't we tolerate them for 60 years, are we so week. I believe I'm strong, I believe I can tolerate reservation for the upliftment of my brothers. I believe that people like KR Narayan, APJ Abdul kalam are the fruits of reservation.
Let people who do like the theme of the movie make another movie or make use of other kind of media to promote and propagate their ideology? Everyone has freedom of expression and there is no need to ban any movie just because a few people don’t like it. If the message of the movie is not liked by majority, it will die a natural death. The protagonists of the ban know that they have a weak cause to fight, hence, the demand for government ban.
The state should not allow any pressure group what ever be the power it may command over political power to militate against freedom of expression in our democracy. The Supreme Court as done in similar earlier situations will up hold this principle, we hope so. The Aarachan should be allowed to screen fearlessely so that let a public opportunity for active debate on the message in the filim be opened up.If there is no freedom of expression,be it in tune to our thought or not, there is no democracy at all in our mother land.
Well written editorial. So many issues are not been discussed in the public. If we open our mouth, some forces want to shut up our mouths- regarding reservation, vote bank politics and pseudo secularism and appeasement of minorities. The film Aarakshan must be released in all states and artistic freedom must prevail.
What could possibly be wrong in this movie? At max Prakash Jha might have shown how the dalits are enjoying the reservation and how the general category people are affected by it. I agree with the editor. The movie screening should be allowed, so we can at least talk about this topic openly.
If the censor board has approved the movie then why these politicians are creating troubles for no sense at all.The reason behind the ban is announced as the film being a threat to the social harmony but these dirty minds don't think that why the social arrangement of our country is in such a way that it will get disturbed only through a movie.Moreover Mr. Punia the chairman of Committee for Scheduled Caste is interfering unnecessarily since censor board committee involved members from backward caste, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes. The ban should lifted immediately.
Democracy has given us the right to watch the movie we want . when reservation is a part of society and everyone of us knows its positive and negative impacts. everyone knows who are the sufferers of reservation( talented general class) then what is the harm in facing it on screen.
1. 'Movies' are merely a mode of entertainment, a weekend exercise! How many of us would rather go beyond these weekends to ponder over a movie and additionally create ruckus ? Imposing a ban on a movie is as good as 'Making a mountain out of a molehill'! 2. Also, why only 3 states have been singled out? Are people in these states believed to be more violent and notorious than the rest of the Indians? If other states can be trusted to have a mind of their own & sensibly watch and react to a movie, why can't these 3 other states too 'toe the line'! 3. Lastly, wearing a blindfold doesn't mean that things have stopped happening around! That is the way things have happened in the past or are likely to happen in future (as portrayed in the movies). Hence, facing the issues head-on should be the choice rather than stifling and suppressing them!
The fact that people in this society are protesting against any form of movie/media article which talks against reservation is sufficient to prove that the reservation system in India has to an extent given rights and opportunities to the under-deserved. And any hint of challenge to this is shown with severe resentment.
What tomfoolery this ? The politicians that have lost out in the public elections and that have no other cause to take up to keep their party morale up seem to have taken a commercial film to revive their parties and party cadre. Even in a state like Tamil Nsdu where there is close to 70% reservation, what is the need for a protest ? Due to this film, is the Govt going to reverse the decision on reservation? When the parties do not voice their concern over the increasing sex and violence in films, it is ridiculous that they take on a film for flimsy reasons. By opposing a film, are they going to stop a film's commercial success or by supporting one are they going to ensure the film's success at the box office ? When the parties are not open to debate and tolerance of alternative ideas, how can we expect 'democracy' from them ? It is time the courts are seized of this matter and rein in the parties.
Amaruvi Devanathan
In a democracy every body has got his opinion and it is always desirable to settle issues that are contentious by discussions. If the leaders feel that the film may cause some damage to the parties concerned, it would be better to sit with the director of the film, put forth their feelings and settle the issues. It is undemocratic to issue threats.
what does the meaning of celebrating the Independence day , if people of the state or country have no right to express their views? Our leaders should be broad minded. Days are gone when public will accept whatever party in power decide. We allow politicians to play with system because at some point we are also wrong.We also should be aware of our responsibilities.
The argument of tarnishing Bihar's image doesn't bear water either. Bihar was for many years a very crime-prone state. Many parts of the state are still the same. One of Nitish Kumar's poll-winning achievements was bringing down the crime rates. Mr Jha has simply shown the state as it is. I for one would definitely think of trying for an IPS career after watching Gangaajal (I mean watching the, albeit dramatized, job of an IPS officer, not of bashing up 7 men single handed). Is that a positive or a negative effect of the film? So such spurious arguments must fall since they have no standing or credibility. The film portrays an aspect of India as it is - it opens up lively and required debates on the subject. Is that so bad?
I disagree with Karuppan. There are those who engage in dialogue to try and find out why their religion is being criticized. They are called thinkers. And there are those who drop bombs at the drop of a hat in the name of religion. They are called extremists, and are banned by law. I also disagree with KK Singh. Aarakshan was meant to be an immediate step for elevation of the socially downtrodden. It wasn't meant to be a permanent system. What's the use of reservations at college level if you won't try to develop primary education in the rural sections of India? Even more foolish is caste-based reservation.
The editorial is very good. BOLD editors can put the country on straight path.
I am happy that there are Indians who employ Reason. This ban has been concocted by Politicians for Votes.
This so - called ban is all Hocus Pocus done in conjunction and approval of the makers of the film because when the ban is lifted (as it inevitably will be) the sale of tickets will sky rocket as everyone will want to see a banned product. This is just a gimmick and I for one am not fooled. Bacchan should gracefully retire and give others a chance to perform. I for one am tired to see the mismatch of reddish brown hair on his head and his white beard. Either he should go all the way with the dyeing stuff or stay natural which would suit him better rather than going half and half. I don't see Hindi movies (they are just too long and too boring) but it would be nice to see some fresh new faces on the Billboards in a country of over one billion people.
Banning anything is the easy way out for the politicians to preserve their territory without a rational thinking.'Reservation' has lost its meaning in today's context and only politicians are exploiting the gullibles to serve their own personl interests and when the film is said to be against the pitfalls of the current system of reservations for education and employment based on caste,naturally the politicians get upset and want to prolong the system by whatever means either fair or foul so as to hold on to their 'power' and 'perks' at any cost damn the high-sounding words of freedom of expression and the like!
Communal or partisan pressure groups have become a menace to any prgressive measures the civil society initiates these days. A work of art is an inclusive or integral piece of the artis's creation. To rip off a particular context and construe it to suit the vested intention of the interested party is a negation of the very purpose creative writing or other work of art
This is the time when we should kick-off the discussion about the right to freedom of speech.How can some vested interested decide what should be seen by entire population.This is encroachment on the right of film to be screened and on the right of viewers as well.Here a major question arises about the capability of the state governments. If you can't ensure the screening of movie then you have no right to stay in office.
Reel life is inspired by real life.if we have accepted the reservation in our society than why we are afraid of a movie. Are we so weak that a movie can endanger our social harmony? Its time for political parties and government to respect the verdict of Censor Board and let the public decide what they want
Yeah the I agree with the editorial. The constitution has provided the right to freedom and exploitation. The court must be the watch dog of those fundamental rights.
The banning of film 'AARAKSHAN ' by some state government is politically motivated as the vote bank politics and the Supreme Court immediately lift the ban to enable people of this country to see the education system being exposed by certain selfish elements including politicians and the film also be made tax free.
I am surprised to read Hindu edit pleading for Aarakshan,quoting freedom of expression when matter is subjudice.Prakash Jha's Arakshan has given ominous signal to devide society, violating rights of deprived lots,guaranteed in Constitution.His film has changed concept of social measures to uplift downtrodden.Freedonm of expression does not give guarantee to encroach lots of deprived.Jha,s Arakshan has given bad names to Bihar.It is not new thing for Jha-he has tarnished image of Bihar like making films-Apaharan, Gangajal etc-now Arakshan will tarnish image of whole country when entire globe providing facilities to poor for upliftment.Jha is minting money by tarnishing image of Bihar and entire country.Hindu mustbe aware of functioning of Censor board-its verdict is not gospel truth!Jha must aplogise to nation and stop encouraging move against most backwards and dalits in name of merit.Not 'Murdochisation' of media! my blog: www.kksingh1.blogspot.com
It is rather appalling that our government has to be given such basic lessons of Democracy. Freedom of expression is indeed a cornerstone of democracy and hiding behind excuses, that it may ruin public calm, will not save the day for the government. One just hopes that justice prevails in the end and the Tuesday`s hearing goes the positive way.
One should not allow these type of practices for whatever reason they are being practised. This ban is unconstitutional and needs a rethink.
I watched this movie yesterday.Prima facie 'AARAKSHAN'looks like based on casteism but subsequently it gives more stress on commercialization of education,which is a cruel truth.There is nothing painful in this movie for any section of the people.
Our democracy is in deep trouble & events of last one year has created panic among people.Now the Arakshan movie issue,politicians will decide what should be shown & what not.Shame shame
Peace and communal amity is more important than freedom of expression. If you allow somebody to talk loudly about the short comings of one religion then obviously the said religionists would protest. So saner sense should prevail among us.
Constitution and its articles which provides freedom of speech is not meant for the people who are rich and elite, it it ment for each and every citizen of the society. So the prople who are in favour of lifting ban on the movie Aarakahsn should give equal weigtht to the right of speech of economically and socially backward section of the sociey. At the time of film released on Dr Bhim Rao ambedkar these high class people were not ready to listen the cruel facts of the indian society.People who are against the policy of reservation are those who really still believe in casteism and dont want these people to be seated on seats next to them.
Any ban on art work (paintings, sculpture, movies) is completely unjustified and against the freedom of expression. But the yardstick has to same in all cases, eg of 'fanaa', 'parjania' and 'paintings by Hussain' still proves that people (including media and politicians) tend to get swayed by extraneous considerations while demanding a ban on works of art. As for this movie, after seeing the reviews its aptly clear that the movie is basically on 'commercialization of education' and the director has used reservation as an issue to generate public interest and to ensure viewership which in-turn might give commercial success. Moreover, using controversial titles is an old marketing gimmick, billu barber, i am khan are fresh examples. Nevertheless, movie has already been released by now and there seems to be absolutely no 'perceived' law and order problem. Hope the ban will be lifted now.
It doesn't make any sense when a minister's son come in a Mercedes car and show his SC certificate for admission or any such activities.There should be a proper check up in the whole process.Film like 'Aarakshan' are a must in today's social scenario.
It is nothing but abject surrender on part of governement to tactics of blackmail and intimidation.Let the people be allowed to view the movie and make thier own inferences. Or does the government believe that people are not mature enough to judge ?
The hue and cry on the movie is not for anyone's benefit but its one more incident of vote bank politics.Parties have been playing the caste card for years and have risen to attain the power on their fake concern and love for some section of the society. Its disheartening to see the concern not for unprivileged but for a single section of the society.The movie is not being looked as a threat to the peaceful atmosphere in all these states but as a threat to the power.The parties have 2 clear agendas first reiterating the concern for a particular section of the society and second using media for marketing their concern.Freedom of speech is being practiced effectively by political parties but the clash of interest in hindering the freedom of speech in arts .Time to act for a better and effective democracy.
i agree too. some people want to politicize the movie for their own benefits. People of India must think before acting.
FILMS ARE THE MIRRORS OF A SOCIETY.'Aarakshan' is one among them.Since the ball is in the apex court's court, a reasonable judgement must be reached at any cost.The concept of socio-political equality must be enforced and is also expected by the SC.
I completely agree with the article for lifting the ban as per article 19. but my question is where does this article and freedom of speech slogans go when movies like Ambedkar, Alai osai (Tamil) are banned ..Even the movie about the father of our constitution was allowed to be released in TN only after the intervention of Supreme Court. How many media powerhouses made it a issue and had debates on such violation of freedom of speech.Hope the art.19 stays same for all sorts of expressions.
It is alarming that we as a society are becoming increasingly intolerant towards fundamental rights of artistic creativity and expression.Vote-bank politics and thought-policing cannot be allowed to derail the essence of democracy. It will be ironic to the hypocritical politicians that this ban will provoke more people to watch the movie by clandestine means than other public advertisements. I am sure that the Honorable Supreme Court will rule in favor of lifting the ban.
Eloquent and Timely Editorial.
Their should be a clear guidelines on the issues like this, because some time producers and directors uses these stunts to advertise. And Government have censor board to decide on content of movie so other department should only do their own work.
As I've said elsewhere, such actions reveal an increasingly perverse and shocking 'Big Brother' attitude of the GOI. It might even said to amount to Talibanisation of India. I'm not saying impose modern values on anyone. I'm saying, let them all stand in the winds of change. Then they themselves will decide whether to cling on to their current mindset or to move forward. Banning films, stifling dialogue on one hand and only increasing reservations and quotas on the other are no sensible solutions. Of course with MP's who claim that Facebook, Valentine's Day and homosexuality are the root causes of riots that are very clearly traced back to faulty immigration and financial laws, we can hardly hope to expect better.
Development and freedom go hand in hand The freedom of expression will give rise to mental development, a truly modern outlook But it seems our Govt hasn't realized this fact. Indians still look to Medieval institutions for guidance in matters social. This mindset has to change. The very cause of reservations, social schisms, are a thing of the past, and should be slowly eradicated. But it seems that the India politicians are not interested in eradicating this problem. They prefer that India should cling onto these Medieval beliefs as a sort of 'insurance policy' that they will cash when they feel loss of popular support.
Maybe the release of the film would have caused a temporary law and order situation. Efficient policing could have controlled the situation, and then dialogue and debate could have occurred wherein the people themselves would judge whether these Medieval beliefs deserve the respect they get fro Indians. And that would have been a BIG step forward.
Please Email the Editor