Censorship in India: The Right to Read

Indian constitution guarantees freedom of speech just like the American constitution yet places some significant restrictions on it.  According to the constitution these restrictions are in place “in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order or morality”.  The Indian government has used this loophole on numerous occasions to impose censorship.

We Indians know how to express our feelings and ideas.  We have a culture of debating and arguing about issues.  When a few of us get together we invariably end up discussing politics, religion, movies or sports (we rarely talk about the weather or our plans for the weekend).  We understand that there will be different opinions and we know that it is part of life.  This culture of debate is evident in our literature, dance and music.

But I often wonder why the government of India and its state governments do not have the same level of confidence in us that we have among ourselves.  Since independence India has repeatedly banned books, television shows, movies and articles all in the name of protecting our national interests, safeguarding religious harmony and so on.  What is the government trying to protect us from?

In the past few years the Supreme Court of India has played an instrumental part in lifting the ban imposed on certain books and authors by our central and state governments.  In a major victory today a Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices D.K. Jain and H.L. Dattu held that Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code (which gives the state government the right to order a ban on a book if it contains material that can cause communal tension) cannot be invoked on some allegations and apprehensions.

The Maharashtra state government had previously used Section 95 to justify a ban on the book “Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India” by American author James Laine.  The pattern that leads to banning a book in India is now all too familiar.  First the book gets published.  Sometimes immediately or in many cases months or years later an individual or an organization claims that they are offended by the whole premise of the book, the whole book or section of the book.  In many cases the “offended person or group” resorts to violence which maybe targeted at the author, the publisher or the bookstore itself.  The government steps in and immediately bans the book.

This is not the way such issues need to be handled in a democratic India.  We live in a country where a person is innocent until proven guilty.  The onus is on the government or the person or group that claims that they are offended to prove to society why the government should take such a drastic action.  This has to be done using our courts and not by intimidation and violence.

The government on the other hand should not pander and cave to these groups like a puppet.  It is not just the duty of the justice system but also that of the elected government to defend the laws of the land and also to educate the public on what it means to live in a democratic nation.  Banning the book first and then passing the buck on to the judicial system to sort out the mess is very unprofessional and undemocratic.  People in the long term will begin to see the judicial system as the enemy and not the elected government that is sworn to defend the laws of the land.

This intolerant attitude towards differing opinions has long term consequences.  We live an age where the media is mostly owned by large corporations that are driven by market share and profits.  Such a media is very unlikely to spend a lot of its energy to educate, inform, provide a differing viewpoint or have a frank discussion on controversial topics.  For the most part they just want to get along.

There are many newspapers, magazines, TV stations and obviously internet sites today in India than twenty years ago.  There is a lot of information available and this information can be accessed very quickly.  But keep in mind that information and knowledge are two different things.  You are not going to gain knowledge if you keep hearing, reading or watching the same thing over and over again through different media outlets.

One of the last bastions of independent media is the publishing industry (many of the well known publishing houses are owned by large corporations but they are in general more willing to take the risk).  Even with the advent of the internet, the real treasure trove of knowledge still resides inside books.  If you are not into reading then you have no idea what you are missing.  By banning books because some find it offensive is preventing others from gaining knowledge.  This new knowledge might make us uncomfortable, might not be acceptable to us or might challenge our way of thinking.  But it is knowledge nonetheless.

There is no question that reading is fundamental.  But we should ensure that our right to read is not taken for granted by our governments or those who claim that they are offended.

“We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values.  For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people” – John F. Kennedy

Related posts:

1. News Broadcasters Association of India Self Censorship
2. Stand Up For Salman Rushdie and Jaswant Singh
3. Indian Politics: Secularism and Pseudo-Secularism
4. Nationalism in India Equals Hindu Fundamentalism
5. Eradicating Corruption in India: Sonia Gandhi’s Ill-Advised 4 Step Process

Tags: American, banning, censorship, constitution, D.K. Jain, government, H.L. Dattu, Hindu, India, Indian, Islamic, James Laine, John F. Kennedy, Maharashtra, media, read, religion, Right, Shivaji, state

Category: News & Government