It is deplorable that three sentences uttered at a seminar relating to the status of Kashmir within India should have evoked such zealous hyper-patriotic anger and resulted in demands for invoking harsh sedition laws. Writer and social activist Arundhati Roy has strong views on the strife-torn and troubled Valley, which many may disagree with, or regard as extremely contentious. But what possible justification can there be — as the Bharatiya Janata Party has outrageously demanded — for slapping a case against her under Section 124 (A) of the Indian Penal Code, for exciting “disaffection” towards or bringing “hatred or contempt” against the government? Do we lock up or threaten to silence our writers and thinkers with an archaic section of the law that carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, merely because they speak their minds? Why is it criminal to suggest that Kashmir's status in India is not settled despite the accession? Aren't so many others in Jammu and Kashmir saying as much? Didn't Chief Minister Omar Abdullah recently remark that the State had only acceded to, and not merged with, the Indian Union? The central government would do well publicly to make a stand and deny reports that it is considering pressing sedition charges against Ms Roy and Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who addressed the same seminar. Courts too must apply their mind and refuse to entertain frivolous and vexatious petitions that make such outrageous allegations.
In his classic defence of free speech, On Liberty, John Stuart Mill laid down what is known as the ‘harm principle.' It postulates that the only justification for silencing a person against his will is to prevent him from causing harm to others. It is to this powerful libertarian mid-19th century principle that we owe the idea that free speech cannot be proscribed merely because we find it disagreeable, and that curbs may be imposed only if such expression constitutes a direct, explicit, and unequivocal incitement to violence. There is no such nexus in Ms Roy's statements on Kashmir, which are shaped around the theme of gross human rights violations and (as she points out in a statement: "Pity the Nation that has to silence its writers" ) “fundamentally a call for justice.” It is tragi-comic that there is talk of ‘sedition' at a time when it is regarded as obsolete in many countries. Courts have ruled that laws that aim to punish people for bringing a government into hatred or contempt are frighteningly broad and risk being used to suppress radical political views. In Britain, the last completed trial in a sedition case dates back to 1947. In the United States, Supreme Court rulings have rendered toothless the most recent sedition law, the Smith Act enacted in 1940. The controversy over Ms Roy's remarks is essentially much ado about nothing.
Keywords: Kashmir issue, Arundhati Roy
Babu, I completely agree with you on this. We have as a democracy survived far worse in terms of "sedition" and inciting public anger. The few sentences of a dreamer are not going to have us up in arms and at each other's throats,although they have definitely angered a section of our society. After all that this nation has been through in terms of divisive efforts by the very leaders we elect, Ms.Roy's statements are not going to cause riots all over the nation. So i would definitely take the point of view that what she said can be safely put under free speech and it is definitely not a criminal act least of all an anti-national one. I am not going to address the issue of whether the struggle for ' Azadi' is a justified one or whether the army presence in the valley is justified(simply because I am not aware of the ground realities of the region). What is debatable here is whether we as a nation should stoop so low as to brand someone an anti-national troublemaker beacuse of what she said. Think about this, if what she said can be booked under sedition and causing public anger, then what about the sedition that parties like the RSS and MNS do everyday(or what Varun Gandhi said for that matter)? Do such statements by these parties not cause violence and outrage? Why does'nt any Sainik or Sanghvi get booked for sedition? My opinion is this, have faith in our democracy and our people, they are our biggest strengths. The Ayodhya verdict and the peace that followed is a testament to the growing maturity of this nation. Throw away the case against Ms.Roy.
Is Indian Union so fragile to be broken by the comments of a romantic novelist who yearns to be a social reformer? "Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend" is a quote attributed to Mao, a communist leadr. Can't a mature democracy like India deal with a contentious comment from one individual? Hope the court will throw away the case and thus shine a light on Indian democracy.
I do not at all agree with Arundhati Roy's conclusion that millions of Kashmiris want azadi. Kashmir Valley's periphery and the mountians are all ringed by people (like the Gujars) who do not want azadi. Within the Valley too there are many who do not. If the brutalities and the exploitation stops this demand will decrease.However, Arundhati Roy has to be supported for her right to free speech. If she is deprived of that India will suffer, for authoritarianism is not going to stop at this only.
It is high time we define sedition.If by definition Arundhati Roy uttered something which can be considered sedition, then she should not be excused simply because she is a writer. Nobobody can be above our nation. If she had expressed this opinion through her literary writing, one could ignore it in the name of freedom of speech. But making a public address as a 'political activist' does not give her any immunity.
Certainly freedom of an individual should not be curved. But I want to ask some series questions those who talk about the freedom of Kashmiri people. Shall there be free Naga Land or Gorkha Land or Khalistan. Like Kashmir. Nagas and others also wanted independent counties. Even Tamils at time wanted to be independent state. With due respect for Arundhati Roy, can MS Roy define her concept of freedom/ Does she want a disintegrated India? In democratic system every situation of human existence is defined. There is democratic Government in Kashmir and Kasmiries have freedom in given constitution. Perhaps she does not know that the violence in Kashmir is created by some forces beyond the border. I had been frequenting Kashmir valley. The Common people want to live peaceful life in the existing system with full faith in India as their nation. They say that these are a few handfuls of people who misguide the young generation. Do Arundahti and the supportors of her views want disntegration of India?
For the past 110 days, Seeman, leader of the Naam Tamizhar Iyakkam, has been languishing in a prison in Tamil Nadu, arrested under the NSA. His crime was grave indeed: he voiced his opinions on the plight of the Eelam Tamils, supporting their right to self-determination. And he was booked under a variety of charges, including for talking against "national integrity.” And not a single "radical intellectual" (read Delhi-based intellectuals who make statements on a variety of prominent issues) condemned it. And then happens the meeting on Kashmir in New Delhi. And the right wing elements are baying for the blood of Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Arundhati Roy, the media trials. And the reaction from civil society and our radical intellectuals. "Freedom of speech and expression", "sedition is colonial", "draconian laws" and other such terms were used to counter the absurd logic of the loony fringe. The chaps in Tamil Nadu, those who condemned the arrest of Seeman, also used the same terms. Sadly, they neither made it to the "national" dailies nor to the ears of our defenders of democratic rights. (I need to note here that many of the activists who condemned Seeman's arrest do not agree with his line of politics. Neither do I. But I assume he has the same right to express his democratic opinion on political issues as does Roy.) Maybe it has got something to do with the issue Seeman was talking about. The genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka happens to be the worst case of systematic state violence against a people in South Asia. And the least talked about in India's intellectual circles. Apart from Tamil activists and some party intellectuals affiliated to the CPI(Maoist), no one else did any honest appraisal of the struggle of the Eelam Tamils nor condemned the horrors that the Lankan government perpetrated. Even Arundhati Roy, who has written brilliant essays on Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq etc had but a 200 word article on Sri Lanka (and a consecutive interview to Sri Lanka Guardian). But even Ms Roy, with all her positions on grave issues, stopped short of recognising the political demands of the Tamil. This is not an attempt to undermine the issues taken up by these intellectuals. Rather, it is an attempt to understand why some issues get perennially neglected, where oppression is similar or worse. For instance, how many times have we seen conventions in the capital on the rights of the people of the North-East? But on Palestine, whoa! The oppressed in South Asian countries, like others in the Third World, are treated worse than animals. But if one were to observe the patterns in the “ internationalist concerns” of the Indian intellectuals, in an Orwellian sense, some animals appear to be more equal than others. Condemning the attempted assault on the freedom of expression of popular intellectuals and leaders is necessary, but at the same time let us also recognize that silencing of ordinary activists happens on a day-to-day basis, of those who work on the ground among the masses in Kashmir, in Chattisgarh, in Tamil Nadu, in Manipur and so. Recently, Anthony Shimray, a NSCN(IM) leader, was arrested by the Indian authorities. And the Indian state is supposed to be on a Ceasefire Arrangement (CFA) with the NSCN(IM). Who will take up his case the way the intellectuals and civil society took up cudgels for the democratic rights of Ms Roy? Or the case of the Dalit Human Rights Mission activists who are hounded by the Kerala state government? For one is indeed tempted to believe that these intellectuals are in some way, maybe unconsciously, subscribing to the logic of the media market -maximum coverage to that which gets maximum attention. Should this be the case, then the intellectuals are doing a great injustice to the radical politics that they claim to represent. Radicalism is not making the loudest statement about the flashiest issue - it lies primarily in highlighting those issues which have been avoided, even should it make one “unpopular” in intellectual circles. Lack of recognition of these issues, from a Fanonist perspective, is as good as or as bad as opposition.
It is not just about freedom of speech or Kashmir struggle. Roy is right in her point of view and so is the Govt. of India. Its the question to make a decision keeping a broad vision in mind. People of Kashmir know the pain better then others and Govt of India have seen such crisis earlier too. So what is important is to make a right call keeping every aspect in mind. We don't need dominating conflict rather a constructive conflict benefiting all rather one's domination over other.
Arundhati Roy is perhaps the boldest and sanest person in India. Instead of persecuting her, we should be LISTENING to her voice of reason and wisdom. But then, Socrates was put to death by the Athenian state.
i appreciate her by highlighting the facts even knowing the consequences that she too may not be spared by these fanatics,who always support to choke the voices of kashmiris.
Bravo!ms roy you are an true indian and i hope every indian will learn from you how to feel for the oppressed.
Freedom of speech has come to us after centuries of oppression as we were earlier ruled and not governed. But in a modern society, especially when the nation is already facing extreme threats to its very existence, people cannot be allowed to speak up things which are certain to whip up violence or are against the nation's agenda, at least on foreign policy issues.
India is already dealing with a failed, violent neighbour (read Pakistan) and a highly aggressive China. By talking of oppression in Kashmir, you people demoralise the forces that battle for our security. I ask whoever has written this piece as well as the Hindu, How many lieutenants in the army can you name who were willing to put their lives on line by being deployed in Kashmir? How will you respond to the tears of a mother, who has never been to Kashmir, but sheds her tears on the dead body of her son (soldier, major, etc) who died at the hands of militants? Do these Pakistan sponsored militants have any Human Rights Cell too?
Kashmir is a political problem that needs a political solution.
Also one must remember that charity begins at home. Even if it is conceded that Kashmir is not a part of India, can India afford to transfer the state to Pakistan? How good a strategic decision will it be? And will then, advocates of free speech send their sons to border to protect the nation, when Pakistan attacks from the hill tops of Kashmir?
That there is so much debate over the matter itself is an indication that everything is not alright. Particularly the adamant stand taken by the "Prophets of Freedom to Speak". Can they not tender an apology to demean the nation and the over 100 crore people who have been hurt. Is it that to justify any speech, even HINDU has to justify a person's hurtful uttering?
Perhaps there has not been such aggressive debate ever on the main Kashmir issue. This speaks about the way the so called intellectuals are ruling the country.
While I do not agree that Ms. Roy must be charged for "sedition", I also do not completely agree with her comments.
She talks about the stone pelters being harassed and tortured by the police, but why does she conveniently forget to talk about the people who actually fueled this stone pelting ? It only the government of India to be blamed for this mess? Don't the hardliners have any role in this?
Intellectuals are there to talk it out and create debate that would find solution. They are the the conscience keepers of Democratic society much more than any other type. Arundati has been discharging that duty eminently. May her tribe increase.
Kashmir issue needs settlement. The most reasonable settlement is to help them independent, help them to havea democratic society and help them to protect their independence. A national Goverment that ruled it fore sixty years, if it has not won the affection of those people and willingness to stay with us, then it has failed to have it ..Military cannot keep a people inside our Union . Military is only to prevent foegin aggression. Internally democracy should constantly win the allegiance of its people for its national unity. Today it is Kashmir and tommorow elswhere. Let the Union Goverment elarn its lessons here and try to keep intact this fragile national unity everywehre. Mere emotions cannot move people anymore anywhere in the world. Patriotism will turn jingoistic without real effort to strengthen the needs for a people to stay together. If staying in Indian union is not attractive to a section then there is something wrong with the governance.
I fully agree with the views expressed. We are a mature nation. The clamour against Ms Roy is totally unjustified. It is high time for Centre to seriously look for a solution to the vexed problem in the valley rather than pander to those who want to achieve their own political agenda through this uncalled for tirade against Ms Roy.
Most of the arguments for restricting speech go like this: Freedom of speech is fine, but there are boundaries! What about hurt feelings? Offending others' sentiments? Insulting the nation? and so on. This is completely missing the meaning of freedom of speech. Speech that is nice and agreeable needs no explicit protection. Nobody will challenge it. It is specifically offensive, obnoxious, disagreeable speech that is sought to be protected by the concept of freedom of speech. Causing physical harm to another person is where the line is drawn. One of your readers mentioned how hurt she was by some of Ms. Roy's language and says "Freedom of speech is not freedom to abuse the whole country". I'm sorry, but it is. It is the freedom to abuse anything verbally. Anything. And India's greatness as a democracy will only be enhanced if it demonstrates that it can take that abuse and yet uphold its citizens' rights. And I'm confident we are indeed such a great country.
With all due respect to the editor, the assertion that sedition laws are archaic citing examples of the USA and the UK is simply ludicrous in the case of India. The Indian Republic is only 63 years young and all its constituent parts have only been together for that long. I am certainly not advocating that Ms Roy be charged with sedition, or anything else, for voicing her views, but the editor of a well-respected news organisation ought to know better than to indulge in spurious rhetoric.
You have quoted John Stuart Mill in the context of controversy over Arundathi Roy's speech. It is again John Stuart Mill who in his famous quote observes: "If all mankind minus one is of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind". The concept of sedition is medieval and as you have observed is obsolete in many countries.
It would be better to ignore Ms. Roy's inciting speech and not to book her on sedition . But I strongly feel that the right to free speech does also have some moral responsibilities. The timing of Ms. Roy's speech is very unfortunate, leave alone the contents of it. When the valley is already on the boil and when there are separatist leaders evoking "azadi" sentiments in the minds of frustrated people, Ms. Roy could have avoided raking this now. Indian government, no doubt, has to do a major course correction in Kashmir, but that alone doesn't justify people like Arundhati Roy fiddling with the minds of people, who already feel disengaged.
It is unfortunate to see how Indian media is advocating Ms. Roy or any other anti-national people on the name of freedom of speech.Indian media which cry on trivial issues,is supposed to be silent on national issues.Backing anti nationals could not be solution of problems of Kashmir.It was observed that various sections of media did not take as duty to condemn anti national comments of Ms.Roy.Are the agree with her views,Now defencing her on the stand of freedom of speech
I certiainly agree with statements from Mr.Parimel Abhishek, he has rightly said that Azadi will not bring peace or Justice in Kashmir, People should fight unitedly to achieve the real meaning of freedom interms of Love, Peace and bond.
I am no admirer of Arundhati Roy. Many times she has been on the wrong side of issues. But this time I think she has been fair. Immediately after partition of colonial India Kashmir issue became a problem. Instead of solving swiftly like Hyderabad of the Nizam times or later Bangladesh Indian political leaders right from the days of Nehru mishandled the issue. Sentimental considerations,lack of resources and military clout prevented a quick solution. Wrong perceptions that international opinion was on out side and we will get a fair deal, the issue was taken to the United Nations. Our representatives like Arcot Ramaswamy Mudaliar, N.Gopalaswamy Iyengar, and the redoubtable Krishna Menon muddied the whole issue. We got into a trap and agreed to abide by plebiscite or referendum. Having got into a quagmire we have never been able to get out of the situation. During partition time be consented to majority opinion, held several referendums and accepted verdicts. Now if a large majority of people from the beginning hold a different view on integration, why not go through the process as committed by us internationally? This will once for all put an end to the long drawn out bleeding process in Jammu and Kashmir. A formula to give effect to this can be easily evolved. Saying that we have held a number of state elections successfully will not cut any ice. No impartial body will ever consider as fully fair and representative. Will all our political parties and their leaders rise to the occasion?
Kashmir always has been a stage for political skulduggery and dishonest attempts at peace. Being indifferent to the realities won't help us solve the issue. The ado over the remarks of Ms. Arundhathi Roy is just political profiteering. The question is for how long our politicians want the people of the valley to die for their manipulated democracy. considering the extend of human rights violations in the Kashmir valley on both sides of the border what Ms Roy said would certainly have takers in the land.
Dear Arundhati Roy: I write this letter in reply to your piece published in The Hindu.” I greatly appreciate your courage and commitment of travelling in Kashmir and talking to the people who are under the scourge of brutal injustice. I learnt that you have travelled to Sophian, the apple-town in South Kashmir where a brutal rape and murder of Asiya and Nilofer had occurred. Unfortunately, the murderers have still not been brought to justice. May I know under which Govt’s jurisdiction does this subject fall? Isn’t it all about the state police force of Jammu & Kashmir? I agree that justice was denied, but how do you think that azadi will find the murderers. How is this issue of murder related to azadi? In that case, why don’t you travel to my hometown? We are fighting for justice to a college girl who was brutally raped and murdered in her hostel; the murderers are still at large. Why don’t you hear about our state’s film actress? She has been mercilessly gang raped and murdered, and the people involved have still not been brought to justice. Do you think azadi is the solution for every such problem? Would come down to my town to proclaim liberation and freedom of my district or town from India? Secondly, you have talked about the cruelty young stone pelters of Kashmir were subjected to. Why didn’t you talk about the political leaders of Kashmir who fuelled the stone pelting to destabilize the ruling party? You are biased, and it is unfair. It is unfair to tell that India has done injustice to Kashmir with vested interests of nationality. For your information, India is not a piece lo land with mountains, rivers and borders. It was never. Neither Kashmir nor any other state of this land is never under a unity called India. India is people. India was a dream of a Kashmiri who on August 14, 1947 said “At the stroke of midnight hour, we step out from an old to the new. The achievement we celebrate today is an opportunity for greater triumphs and achievements. A new star of freedom rises in the east. May the star never set and hope never (be) betrayed” We remember it as the Kashmiri voice and we remember it with love and pride but not hatred. Poorest of the poor, murders, rapes and all other criminal activities happen everywhere in India, not just in Kashmir, and you cannot assure that in an independent Kashmir, there won’t be murders, rapes and poorest of the poor. Not in India, you cannot assure it anywhere else too. I beg your pardon, not to misunderstand that I’m defending the state where people are denied of justice and freedom. I do not. And I request you to understand that justice and freedom is not just a gift that could have been opened and seen soon after India got freedom. And you complain in such a way that we didn’t show that gift to Kashmiris. India was born just 60 years back and we are still fighting hard to make our democracy work in the way it has to. We have looters, rapists and those who prey on the poorest of the poor, ruling this country. We are fighting for a change, together as India. We have a hope and India is our path. Our latest UPSC topper was a beloved Kashmiri, and we are proud of him. I agree there is real dissatisfaction among the youth in Kashmir. Let India hear their voices, let India help them to get opportunities. People showed their courage to come and vote in the elections held in Kashmir by the Indian Govt. despite of terror threats, why don’t you write about their courage and hope. We need writers who are progressive, but not those who make meaningless statements. Please be in Kashmir and bring out the facts about injustice, you are doing a great job to realize justice and freedom, envisaged by our freedom fighters. You are helping people to let their voices heard. But you sound meaningless when you say that azadi is a solution. Because problems which Kashmir is facing are problems to any other state in this country and azadi is not a solution. We are holding our hands, to realize our dream. Please don’t break our bonds. Please be silent if you have such intention.
Why is it we frown upon loyalty to one's own caste, tribe, language, colour, race, religion, region etc., based on which human society has organically evolved over thousands of years but sing the praises of loyalty to king and country as patriotic? Why is it we discourage casteism, tribalism, linguistic chauvinism, racism, religious intolerance, regionalism etc., just as we pounce on treason as treacherous? The imposition of the concept of the nation state on other parts of the world by the European colonisers, the divisions of ancient civilisations brought about by modern political boundaries have given rise to many of the enduring conflicts of the post colonial period including Kashmir. With globalisation and the evolving global village, should we not endeavour to organise the affairs of the human society on a global scale rather than on the basis of conflicting national interests?
It is hard to understand why the BJP is crying foul and finding fault with what Ms Roy has said about the present constitutional position of Kashmir State vis-a-vis India.If what she has said is a culpable crime and to be meted out severe punishment, the words of Mr Advani and others on the fateful day of Babri Majid demolition were also equally culpable. So were the abetting words of Mr Modi that set his state on fire,following the Godra incident.
India is completing its course as a Paper democracy. Democracy exists in India during the election for the whole population, when its mostly the poor who exercise their voting power, and then it functions only for the rich and powerful. We have to look ourselves and understand that we don't treat Kashmiris as Indians. We don't let them learn together with us or work together with us or to have the freedom enjoyed by the lucky citizens from most other parts of India. We don't even let them have the benefit of our justice system when sins are committed by our own men in uniform. We don't think why stone pelters are bought down by bullets only in Kashmir. Elsewhere in India, stone pelting and burning and destroying public property is part of Political activism and leaders and followers walk scott free, except if its done by some hapless Muslims who will be checked in as terrorists. We seem to have forgotten that Kashmir was the most important tourist attraction before the 89's in India. Even recently, more Kashmiris exercised their voting rights, than the upper middle class and rich pockets of India. I beg our Government to listen to the dissenting voices. From what I understand, they really do not want to be a completely free country. They just want to have the peace and freedom enjoyed by Millions of Indians in other parts in equal way. We forget that this was the only state which was annexed to India after guaranteeing them a lot, which we dont follow at all.
It is deplorable that a newspaper which does not compromise in issues of national integration, is diluting its stands in defence of dubious issues like "free speech", "death penalty" etc. These are issues that are usually used by criminals to defend their shady agenda expressed in politically correct terms. A nation that ruthlessly crushes sedition, inflammatory speech, is a nation that stays and moves together. There is nothing like Free Speech. The more and more we speak about these issues, the more we complicate them. With diplomacy, dialogue or ruthless force, any effort at secession should be put down. After that starts the long process of building the economy of that place. Once economy is built, people will not have time for such divisive talk. But for that to start, we need a conducive atmosphere. Encouraged by a bankrupt state like Pakistan, which has a bomb in one hand and a begging bowl on the other, pseudo intellectuals engage in these talks for cheap publicity.
Ms. Roy's comment is derogatory of the Indian Constitution as J&K is an integral part of india. Being an Indian I can't support her. There may be a question of right violation but disintegration of country is not the solution.
It is more a pity that a National Newspaper like Hindu, should advocate indifference to a provocative statement by Ms.Roy. Don't you realize that she virtually challenged Govt. of India? She was emphatic that Kashmir never acceded to India, contrary to facts, to mislead the audience. When you say that many Kashmiris have the same feeling as Ms.Roy, what about people in Jammu and Ladakh? If you say you know the pulse of people there, I also, having lived for Three years in J&K, can tell you that your views are not fully correct. Ms.Roy has the habit of rubbing the Government and Society on the wrong side. It is, therefore, correct to moderate her, just as you want to moderate our comments to suite your views, in your Newspaper.
It is refreshing to read such forthright comments in your Editorial. A few days back, uring a TV programme, when the Editor-in-chief of Tehelka and a Senior Advocate of the Supreme court were giving their views on the injustice being meted out to the poor Adivasis in the naxal areas and the government's apathy towards the issue, a senior police officer who was participating in the programme, immediately sprung a surprise saying that both of them should be booked for acting against the state. Indian society at large is becoming increasingly intolerant towards views expressed against a populist agenda , while at the same boasting and crying aloud in the world forums that we are the largest democracy etc. We had seen the mood of the people in the valley, even during 1983 cricket match in Srinagar, when they were openly supporting West indies. This is possibly the reason, why the govt is afraid and hesitates to go for a referendum in the state on this issue. The media on its part should take the lead, in conducting a large scale survey on this issue and elicit the opinion of a large chunk of the state to know where their loyalty lies?
A much awaited piece of writing. You may or may not agree with what Roy says, but suppressing her and putting her behind the bars doesn't make sense! This not only re-confirms the fact that she was somewhere right in her perception of our Government but also makes our Government a sham! I sincerely believe she hasn't said anything that can be the reason enough to jail her.
I totally agree when you say freedom of speech is required and demands by BJP are outrageous, but your article won't be complete till you consider the impact of such statements. Let's say the government bends to the will of the separatists and frees Kashmir from India, then what? Will it be a happy little Switzerland of Asia?
It is preposterous that speaking a person's mind could amount to sedition.I believe it is the fundamental right of every citizen to question anything about public life. Millions of educated and liberal citizens of India share Ms.Roy's views,should all of them be thrown in prison?Comments and occasions like these should be taken as an opportunity for introspection.The BJP has never gotten out of the Hindi,Hindu and Hindustan mould and even the Congress spokesman was busy belittling Ms.Roy.As a nation we must aim to be a magnanimous one which allows free speech and thought not a nation which is so insecure that it cannot handle criticism.Above all,we must be generous to our people and not bind them to certain ideas.
I agree with the view that free speech must be respected in a democracy. But as an Indian, i am deeply hurt. Not for Arundhati Roy's outrageous remark demanding Azadi(?) for Kashmir but more so for her denegrating our nation. When she says that India is a nation of Bhukhe-nange, it is highly derogatory. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to abuse whole country.
If Kashmir is a part of India like the other states, a reasonable question arises as why ordinary citizens are barred from buying assets in Kashmir and settling there. What Arundhati stated was an echo of what she felt the sentiments of Kashmiris was, and the masses who voice to stone her are interpreting the statements according to their own whims and fancies. It is not government ministers or political parties that dictate freedom of speech and patriotism, as they didn't write Indian constitution in the first place.
We know BJP, they always are an opportunist, you can see all that is happening in Karnataka if at all you need an example. BJP always tried to create a sensation, like they did in Ayodhya, in Gujarat riots, in Mumbai, in Orrisa. I havent even touched up the Terrorism by RSS and VHP. BJP is clearly trying to break the country apart. British taught "Divide and Rule" policy, BJP implemented it. Sad that such people are allowed or let free in General Public to do harm.
I think it's preposterous to file sedition charges against these people, it's better to confront them with arguments justifying the need for Kashmir to remain in India. On the same note I would like The Hindu to take the same stand on things like the Danish cartoons which never intends to harm anybody but attempts to explore the realms of free speech.
I agree with the thrust of the editorial. The problem arises, in my opinion, when influential persons and intellectuals take extreme positions publicly in order to highlight and right the many wrongs that the State inflicts on its citizens, either due to poor governance or political compulsions. The danger is that divisive elements exploit the resulting hysteria to advance their pet dreams of azaadi, while the government keeps abdicating its duty to govern. The basic challenge is one of unequal opportunities and uneven development. Long past, were not demands made for separation from the Union by Punjab and Tamil Nadu? Today they are among the leaders in development.
At a time when the concept of Nation-states is becoming increasingly irrelevant and the number of international citizens is on the rise, the specter of such jingoism and purported nationalism is reflective of the bigoted views of the far right. Democracy is based on the premise of power to the people and when those very people do not wish to be a part of the union, it is only yet another opinion voiced by the people that the union needs to respect and address, rather than crush with an iron boot.
That is not to say that Kashmir needs to be conceded or made independent, the government needs to address the issue by analysing the ground reality and if no other viable alternative is found to granting freedom, that should be done. People's opinion (the stakeholders) is more important than that of majoritarian politicians.
Already Government of India has appointed interlocutors to get an access to Kashmir problems. Restriction of speech and imposition of fear to express free openion may not clear the way to real perception of problems in Kashmir. Politics must not revolve around speech. Rather there should be continous and consistent effort to contain Kashmir people's mind and soul.
India will do well to promote freedom of speech even if what is being said is something majority disagree with. Galileo was jailed for saying the sun is the center of the universe. Who knows how many ideas are being suppressed in India today?
India adopted a progressive Constitution with very liberal and democratic provisions and protections, but failed to adopt a modern national penal code. The bulk of the IPC dates back to the 19th century, and no government, past or present, tried to modernize it.
To say that Kashmir is a disputed territory is to state a simple fact. To recognise that there is also a dispute about the constitutional future of Kashmir is a recognition of the reality there. To say that the status of Kashmir is a bone of contention between different groups who live there is also a matter of fact. Prosecution of Roy or Geelani cannot alter any of the above facts. Instead of recourse to the repression of ideas by dusting out of the cellar outmoded laws on sedition, government needs to encourage the expression of all shades of opinion for critical public scrutiy. Perhaps a solution would then emerge over time.
This newspaper stands out in the crowd of the mostly irrational and jingoistic mainstream media, for its courage of conviction. Even in the face of obvious and cacophonic disagreement from a parochial majority,this newspaper has voiced its free spirit without fear or favor. The Hindu stands as the epitome of true journalism.
India is a federal republic, not monolithic in religion , language and culture. It is essential to keep this kind of talk and activism by Roy and others in check, unless we want to abolish our republic. Freedom of speech, when it comes to the undoing of our republic shall be suppressed at any cost.
Let Kashmir go free. Let them live in liberty. I don't understand the point after India got its freedom from British is making. When Indians have the right to freedom, Karshmiris too should have. Indians know what it is like living under slavery. Why Kashmiris are made slaves to India?
Please Email the Editor