October 26, 2010
Pity the nation that has to silence its writers: Arundhati Roy
- PHOTO: NISSAR AHMAD Arundhati Roy
Yesterday I travelled to Shopian, the apple-town in South Kashmir which had remained closed for 47 days last year in protest against the brutal rape and murder of Asiya and Nilofer, the young women whose bodies were found in a shallow stream near their homes and whose murderers have still not been brought to justice.
I met Shakeel, who is Nilofer's husband and Asiya's brother. We sat in a circle of people crazed with grief and anger who had lost hope that they would ever get ‘insaf' — justice — from India, and now believed that Azadi — freedom — was their only hope. I met young stone pelters who had been shot through their eyes. I travelled with a young man who told me how three of his friends, teenagers in Anantnag district, had been taken into custody and had their finger-nails pulled out as punishment for throwing stones.
In the papers some have accused me of giving ‘hate-speeches,' of wanting India to break up. 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.
Arundhati Roy
October 26, 2010
source; The Hindu
'Sedition' versus free speech
Editorial: The Hindu
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
Comments:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
Comments:
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.
from: Radha Kumud Das
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 08:01 IST 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.
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.
from: Karthik B
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 08:58 IST 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.
from: Ramakrishnan
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 10:25 IST 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.
from: guardian
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 10:48 IST 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.
from: Raj
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 10:49 IST 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.
from: Thoms
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 11:15 IST 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.
from: Manish Manocha
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 11:35 IST 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.
from: Sarat Rao
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 11:56 IST 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?
from: akhil singhal
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 12:35 IST 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.
from: Bose
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:04 IST 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?
from: P.G.RAVIKUMAR
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:31 IST 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.
from: kumar
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:37 IST 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.
from: dr.suman chakraborty
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:41 IST 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.
from: Ashok
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:45 IST 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.
from: Rajesh
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 13:51 IST 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.
from: M SOMASEKHAR PRASAD
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 14:48 IST 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?
from: mohansingh
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 15:02 IST 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.
from: Pravimal Abhishek
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 15:34 IST 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.
from: Jijeesh P B
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 15:40 IST 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?
from: K.Venkataraman
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 16:36 IST 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.
from: Eswar
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 17:09 IST 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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------from: Ambuj srivastava
Posted on: Oct 27, 2010 at 18:03 IST 
