The Supreme court yesterday severely reprimanded West Bengal Police for issuing summons to a lady living in Delhi. She had posted pictures of the assembly of persons, in violation of the lockdown protocols in Raja Bazar, a minority-dominated area of Kolkata. The lady challenged the summons because it violated her right to freedom of speech and expression as enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
The counsel appearing for the State of West Bengal clarified that she would not be arrested but only questioned, which infuriated the Judges. The judges observed, “Do not cross the line. Let India remain a free country. We, as the Supreme Court are here to protect free speech. The reason why the Constitution created SC is to ensure that ordinary citizens are not harassed by the State.”
Governments, both the Centre and most of the States have shown scant respect for freedom of speech; West Bengal is no better than any other. Professors are jailed for lampooning the Government with cartoons or blogs; girls incarcerated for caricaturing the high and mighty in the Government.
The intolerance is widespread, often the religious hardliners taking on the bloggers, cartoonists and poets like in France and Bangladesh. In India, it is the Government and their notorious army of supporters, who attack ruthlessly and relentlessly. The Government has used summons and arrests frequently making a mockery of the ‘Freedoms’ accorded to our citizens. No wonder India features just a shade higher at 142 in the world Press Freedom rankings out of 180 countries surveyed. Pakistan is ranking the 145. (rsf.org)
Social networks have given a virtual platform for everyone to reveal their minds. Nothing remotely closer existed on earth earlier. The users are often ignorant of the protocols and regulations that can qualify as etiquette or a regulation. There are chances that the unbridled freedom of expression could be misused at times, but the networks are here to stay. Governments must learn to live in an atmosphere of being criticized, and to ignore where it has to. Personal and vindictive attacks are a different matter, where the offenders must be warned, and in case of repetitions can be tried under the laws of the land.
The provision of Sec 66A of the Information Technology Act 2001 was inserted through an amendment act in 2008, criminalized sending ‘offensive messages’ online. The Supreme Court struck it down on 24 March 2015, stating that it was unconstitutional. Even long after that, people were booked under the draconian law, until the Court stepped in and warned the governments.
“Cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa lex,” Herbert Broom’s text of 1858 on legal maxims lists the phrase under the heading ″Rules of logic″, stating: Reason is the soul of the law, and when the reason of any particular law ceases, so does the law itself. In this case, the freedom enshrined in the Constitution is akin to the soul and is indestructible and ever-living, as stated in Bhagwat Gita:
“antavanta ime dehā nityasyoktāḥ
śharīriṇaḥanāśhino’ prameyasya tasmād yudhyasva bhārata.”
– Only the material body is perishable; the embodied soul within is indestructible, immeasurable, and eternal. Therefore, fight, O descendent of Bharata! (BG 2.18)
Sampath Kumar
Intrépide Voix
