The rules against lampooning the tricolour place the largest democracy in the company of the most authoritarian regimes
The British are very careless about the way they treat their flag and so are the Japanese. The French get upset only if their flag is reviled during a public ceremony when the Republic is all dressed up. Sweden and Norway are easy about the flag but America, like India, has an elaborate flag code which carries a number of restrictions.
Negative trait
Trust India, as always, to pick a negative trait from America and enshrine it in law. The British who ruled India for over a century just about allow everything and everyone, in whatever position or bodily form, to carry the colours of the Union Jack. The question that naturally arises is: why did our flag code not imitate British practice? The Canadians did and they too were once a British colony. In fairness, though, while America is very honour conscious about its flag, it allows it to be burnt as a right to expression.
Even so, in none of these countries is anybody charged for lampooning the national flag in a cartoon. Denmark advocates that care be taken so that the flag does not trail on the ground and the Germans balance their laws against flag desecration with the right to freedom of expression. Ireland has no established norms on how the flag should be treated, but only advises that it should be handled with care and respect. It does not elaborate the matter much beyond that.
But in India we are different. Not only is the caricature of the flag a major offence but it can be coupled with other charges, such as sedition, to lock people up. Now this is pretty serious stuff and quite uncommon in the democratic world. But take issue with the Indian law on this and you might well end up in a cell as cartoonist Aseem Trivedi did. It is true that India is not entirely alone in its sensitivity to political cartoons, especially involving the flag. Countries like Saudi Arabia, China or Iran, which are hardly democratic, would have reacted in the same way. As we pride ourselves for following the Westminster model and for being the world’s largest democracy, surely best practices in places like Britain should have been our guide.
Cartoons that play around with the national flag feature quite regularly in a variety of British newspapers like The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Observer or The Daily Telegraph. In fact, way back in June 1977, a cartoon appeared in The Observer which was similar in style to what Aseem Trivedi had drawn, but nothing happened. In the British cartoon, the crisscrossing lines of the Union Jack were shown as if they were cancelling out the national chant, “God save our Gracious Queen.” But the cartoonist did not face any legal action; he came out of it bright eyed and bushy tailed. In fact, in Britain even the Queen is not cartoon-proof.
When two socialists threw a flaming Union Jack at the Queen’s motorcade, all they got was a wrap on the knuckles for a breach of peace. The flag could have been any old rag as far as the British law was concerned. During the recent London Olympics, a local company producing cushions with the British flag wanted to capitalise on the event but had to stop production instantly. This was not because of any offence to national honour, but because the Olympic copyright rules would not permit any other logo but its own.
Though the United States is touchy about the flag, a number of liberties can be taken with it as Americans simultaneously respect the freedom of expression. Not only is flag burning not prohibited in that country, any cartoon depiction of the stars and stripes escapes judicial intervention too. In The Denver Post, for example, Mike Keefe drew the American flag with this saucy accompanying tag: “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America — a wholly owned subsidiary of the People’s Republic of China.” This was easily far more audacious in content than what Aseem Trivedi had drawn. By using China to taunt America, Keefe cut the U.S. administration and rubbed salt into the wound at one go. In India, that would be plain sedition!
In some other flag cartoons that have appeared in the U.S. national press, the stripes are positioned alongside stars but as they would appear on the Chinese flag. In some cartoons, the stars appear as gravestones, the remains of a war.
The stripes too have been depicted in a number of ways, sometimes even as prison bars or as rifles. Obviously these were inspired by cartoonists who were peaceniks, just as Aseem Trivedi today is an Anna Hazare groupie.
Before we forget; there are some well brought up countries like Norway, Denmark and Japan who are quite exemplary. They allow their own flags to be burnt or caricatured, but won’t stand for it if that were to happen to a foreign flag on their soil.
Insecurity?
All of this raises the obvious question: are we as a nation so insecure that we see sedition everywhere, even in a humble cartoon? A page out of history might help reach a conclusion.
Diana Donald, a British academic, has argued that the Age of Caricature which first emerged in mid 18th Century England came to an abrupt end with the French Revolution. William Pitts, the then British Prime Minister, had a violent attack of the shakes because he saw Robespierre look alikes everywhere. He promptly banned political cartoons in the hope that this would keep insurrectionist ideas from seeping in across the channel. It was only after Nelson chalked up victories in Trafalgar and Waterloo that British confidence returned and so also did the cartoons.
Of course, the Nelson option is not open to us so we need to think of other confidence gaining measures. Perhaps a healthier, more robust and a sustained growth rate? Perhaps, a more caring democracy that delivers services to the people. Something has to give.
Till then our news channels will verge on the comic, and the comic will increasingly appear as news.
(The writer is a former professor of Jawaharlal Nehru University)
Keywords: national flag, sedition, cartoon, democracy, freedom of expression, National Honour Act, Flag Code of India, Flag Code 2002



Freedom of speech and expression is natural right in democracy but not at the cost of nation's(citizen's) sentiment. We are respecting the flag not because of it is national symbol, but because of tens of thousand of our forefathers (like Tirupur Kumaran) who gave their life to protect the flag and raise above the enemy and factions. It is a symbol of India united. No flag No India (as multiplicity divides)
I simply does not agree with author's point. What it has to do with us how other
countries like UK or USA treat theirs flag. We as Indians respect/ love our flag. Flag is
a symbol of Republic of INDIA, Peoples of INDIA, Common man. It isn't a symbol of
Government of INDIA, Ruling party or political class.
So it should not be insulted. Yes I agree sedition is too big a charge but whoever does
it should not be proud of it but rather be reprimanded..
I disagree with some of the points that author had pointed out that we
do not have full right of expression regarding our national flag.I just
want to state that we should respect our symbol that why we do not have
right to disrespect our symbol and our democracy provide full right that
we can host flag at any place on any day.But I agree with the author
about right to expression is denied in case of cartoonist. He has his
full rights to express his feeling similar as all political parties
protest in parliament,he has his own way of protesting.
The article was well-meaning but it lacked the a proper argument. Is the
author appreciating actions that demean a flag or is he talking about
how authoritarian the Indian State is, with regard to the flag? He is
not clear on any of the fronts.
Also, saying that India took on the American and not the British
attitude towards the flag after Independence is an anomaly among its
laws, is a very problematic statement. It is not A=B. Effects of
colonialism are much more complex.
Perhaps the author could have done well to explore further the
historical relevance of the flags; not just their contemporary use as
mere symbols of nationalism. His examples suggest that countries who
fought for their freedom under a banner seem to cherish their flags.
His overall point, however, is a very valid one. While we have
caricatures of Gandhi (another cherished symbol of our freedom
struggle), are we ready for caricatures of our flag, and other
important personalities (sadly not, based on recent developments) of
our freedom struggle?
Flag is just a flag. Its merely a symbol. In my opinion the way british treat their flag is really good. And a cartoon is also just a cartoon. It is simply a way to express yourself. In india, we are too much sensitive about anything like religion, anthem, flag etc. We called ourselves a modern democrasy but we behave like a orthodox.
India certainly is the largest democracy in the world and the best
practices in countries like Britain should be our guide. One of the
best practices in those countries is not denying services of a lawyer
to anybody including those charged with acts of terrorism. I remember
distinguished supreme court advocate A.G. Noorani quoting Edmund Burke
in an article who made the famous statement in House Commons that a
lawyer refusing brief is beginning of the end of liberty in England.
So in the largest democracy lawyers who accept briefs of persons
charged with terrorism are not terrorized. Aseem Trivedi did not think
of making fun of such mindset by drawing a suitable cartoon when
lawyers defending blast accused were being beaten up outside courts in
UP and Mumbai. In fact his cartoon on Ajmal Kasab suggests otherwise.
He and his associates in Anna Hazare crowd are not certainly champions
of liberal democracy being practiced in countries like Britain which
is borne out by their attitude towards Prashant Bhushan when he
advocated more autonomy to J&K. Just because an Asim trivedi has been
charged with sedition charges, which also is being withdrawn in no
time it is wrong to conclude that as a nation we are insecure. Forget
this Asin Trivedi thing, we did not feel insecure even when there were
fractured verdicts and nation had to be run by caretaker governments
for days before a government with numbers could be installed and the
army was strictly confined to the barracks all that time unlike some
of our immediate neighbors. I hope ‘The Hindu’ will not waste anymore
precious space on the cartoonist who does not deserve it.
Respect to national flag or any kind of national symbol is inseparable
part of the chauvinism toward one's country but along with this to
live in a vibrant democracy right of expression is also equally
necessary.Lampooning of national symbols by some cartoonist or media
people is not for their vested interest.It is just a moderate way to
express the view of the crowd what they are passing from.The charge of
sedition for such acts is not going to be helpful for the good health
of democracy and governance.As the author described that there are
many countries which really don't care for such issues and not making
them complicated as happens in India but still they are functioning
properly and progressively.Thus agenda should not be sedition for the
people who speaks draw or write on behalf of the people but to
eradicate those who corrupt this nation by taking bribe sitting under
same flag or national emblem.The act of lampooning is just like showing
mirror to the governance.
While on common sense it is definitely not desirable to see the way our national flag is being used, let us also look at the reasons also.If the constitution , a sacred document meant to uphold our national identity and its representation, the national flag, can be amended to include the whims of a corrupt leaders of political parties, where as for Lokpal a consensus is necessary to get implemented, what is the meaning of such national flag.
Indians have their own definitions on what a democracy is supposed to mean.
I must compliment the author for bringing out detailed study on Flag
Code in proper perspective.To his question, "are we as a nation so
insecure that we see sedition everywhere", I may submit that our
political class has landed itself in a situation where it is surviving
just as necessary evil. Hence, with every passing day it is feeling
more and more insecure. Hence, the follies like that of the arrest of
Aseem on charges of sedition take place. As far as common man on he
street is concerned, I am sure, he hardly feels insecure about it.
The author's eagerness to put America down in the first paragraph totally sidetracks this article and it loses the main point. He says "America places a number of restriction on flag use", but fails to list any of them. The fact is that in America freedom of speech ensures that burning of flag as well as lampooning the flag is accepted. The author loses credibility in trying hard to score a cheap point by comparing Indian and American flag treatment, a subject that is NOT comparable at all. The author will do well not to try to put down America at any cost, because it only makes the author look silly. Indian readers are smarter than you give them credit for.
What makes the author say "we pride ourselves in following the Westminster model"? This is just a hackneyed iteration that was faulty at any point in time anyway. Who is his "we" here? Secondly, why is it that the UK still has a monarch as its constitutional head? The author has little originality and even less critical rigour.
Please Email the Editor