Politics
Freedom of expression and religious sentiment
This is a continuation of my previous post on the attack on Taslima Nasreen. As I said before, the attack is simply outrageous. So, you can imagine my outrage and disgust when I read that the Hyderabad has slapped a case against Ms. Nasreen for hurting Muslims’ religious sentiments. The way the Hyderabad police is handling the case is worth protesting against.Why should Ms. Nasreen not speak out against the perceived ills of Muslim society? I can understand it if the person who speaks out is an outsider. As a Muslim herself, does she not have the right to question what is wrong with the religion in which she was raised? Does freedom of expression mean nothing today? Where is the famous tolerant spirit we Indians are so fond of telling the world about?
Right to free speech?
Yesterday’s attack on controversial Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen speaks volumes about the increasing intolerance in Indian society. We, as Indians, pat ourselves on the back about democratic tradition in our beloved homeland and pride ourselves on the inherent tolerance of the Indian people. But, where has that tolerance gone now? Ms. Nasreen was in Hyderabad to release the Telugu version of her new book Shodh, when activists of the All-India Majilis-E-Itihadul Muslimeen attacked the gathering. Not only is the attack worth condemning but the words of a local AIMIM MLA on CNN-IBN are simply outrageous. He claimed, in full view of television cameras, that the “punishment” meted out to Ms. Nasreen was insufficient and she should have been killed to teach a lesson to all other presumptuous Muslim women who dare to speak out against oppression. The new book Shodh explores the life of a woman wanting to break free and live life on her own terms.
The AIMIM claims that the book is anti-Islamic and that Taslima Nasreen is a kafir for daring to express herself. The attack against Ms. Nasreen is just one example of the growing intolerance in Indian society. In fact, the incident reminded me of the annual anti-Valentine’s Day vandalism carried out by the Shiv Sena. It is not just religious fundamentalist groups who indulge in such acts. A few years ago, about 20 young couples were arrested by the Chennai City Police at a park in Anna Nagar, one of the posher areas of the city. When the parents of the arrested arrived, the police claimed to have arrested them for indecent exposure in public. Apparently, holding your boyfriend’s hand in broad daylight is considered indecent exposure. As usual, the local Hindu Munnani activists and other fundamentalist outfits, both Hindu and Muslim, condemned the behaviour of the poor couples and blamed the decadence on the West.
All this brings us to one fundamental question. Since when is speaking your mind taboo in this country? Why should Ms. Nasreen be attacked simply because she chose to say out aloud what many of us think privately anyway? A more pertinent question would be why nobody does anything when such incidents occur? Everyone from the AP Chief Minister to the Prime Minister to the press condemns the attack on Ms. Nasreen, but the attackers were let off on bail almost as soon as they were arrested. Chances are the case will be forgotten over the next week. Why does nobody think it fit to arrest the man who practically called for Ms. Nasreen’s assassination and slap a charge of inflammatory speech on him? All this makes me wonder whether the right to free speech is not merely a politically correct thing to accord in this country. Do we really have the right to free speech without fearing reprisal? I don’t know.
Journalism and the case against Dr. Haneef
The case against Dr. Haneef has finally ended. He is back home in the safe haven of his home country. Nobody can throw him in prison for being present illegally. But, during my three-day stay in Bangalore, I noticed something about the way the media has handled the case. My case against the media is restricted to the editorial line taken by the Times of India, one of the oldest and most respected newspapers in India. In its editorial titled “The Haneef Case”, dated 28 July 2007, the TOI says, “When the Australian authorities realised they had made an error of judgment, they acted upon it. Which is not something investigating agencies in India always do. Police here have the dubious record of detaining suspects without charge for much longer than the 90-day limit….” It does not stop there. It goes on to claim that, “yes, if Haneef is not guilty, his visa must be reinstated by Australia and he must be allowed to return to India with honour. But before we cry foul the next time an Indian is detained abroad, we could soberly reflect upon our civil liberties record at home and put in perspective any perception of unjust prosecution elsewhere.” I find this attitude both shocking and irresponsible especially since it appears in a serious and respected newspaper like the TOI.
If one were to accept the argument of the TOI, does the Indian government reserve the right to torture, kill or maim a Sudanese citizen on the grounds that the Sudanese government itself does not respect human rights? In Haneef’s case, does the fact that the Indian government does not have the moral right to demand fair treatment given its own civil liberties record justify the actions of the Australian Federal Police? I should think not. Human rights are universal. No matter what is done in India, no matter how bad our justice system, and no matter how flawed the actions of our police, I believe that all human beings deserve to be treated fairly and justly. If an Indian citizen suffers at the hands of a foreign government, it is perfectly normal that the Indian government mount pressure to obtain a free trial. That is exactly what the Government of India has done in the Haneef case. A newspaper as respected as the Times of India asking us to examine our own record before demanding justice for a citizen arrested abroad is unacceptable. To me, it is irresponsible journalism.
Farewell, President Kalam
This morning, I was watching the news on CNN-IBN. One report was on President Kalam’s last day in office. Tomorrow, the President-elect, Mrs. Pratibha Patil will be sworn in as President. On this occasion, CNN-IBN interviewed children in schools all over India to find out how they feel about the change of guard at Rashtrapati Bhavan. Why ask children? Because, this man is close to our hearts in a way no other president has ever been in the history of independent India. Because this man dared to dream of a super-power India by 2020. And because he took his ideas, not just to the people on the street, but to the citizens of tomorrow, the children of today.
The response of the children in question demonstrated the extent to which Dr. Kalam has made an impression on the future decision-makers of India. Practically all of the children interviewed said they were sorry to see him go. Some said he should remain president forever. Others said the way the elections had been held was simply dirty politics. Whatever be their opinion on the President and his successor, all of them thought he was the best President India has ever had the good fortune of having. To me, this attitude is gratifying. It is with great pride that I watched the report. It is reassuring to know that the children of today use their intelligence to judge the calibre of a person, something that our beloved adult politicians would do well to learn.
Personally, I could never respect another President as much as I respect Dr. Kalam. He is an exceptional individual. I am not a student of the hard sciences, but to be frank, I would not mind enduring mathematics and chemistry all over again just to be able to listen to him teach. I couldn’t agree more with the teens interviewed on television. He certainly is the best president India has ever had. Goodbye, Dr. Kalam. We will miss you as our president.
Electing a President…
Electing a president for the world’s largest democracy seems to be getting more and more difficult. We have come a long way since the choice of a presidential candidate was reached through consensus among the largest political parties. The election of Ms. Patil seems to be getting dirtier and dirtier every day. Her candidature, which came as a surprise to most political parties, and the way the campaign for the presidential office has been conducted by the Congress and the Left parties tarnishes the image of the nation’s highest office. It is difficult to imagine Ms. Patil, with her typical politician’s zeal and blind and unfailing devotion to Ms. Sonia Gandhi occupy the same position that is currently occupied by someone as dignified and respectable as Dr. Kalam.
The excitement and euphoria of finally having a woman president disappears under the high drama of the elections themselves and I now find myself wondering if her election really means something for the women of India. I would say no. India’s First Citizen must be one to whom all his compatriots must look up. He/she should be able to inspire admiration, or at the very least, respect from the country’s major political parties. I do not see Ms. Patil acquiring that kind of universal acceptance anytime in the near future. I fear the President will become a mere puppet in the hands of Ms. Gandhi as she consolidates and perpetuates her hold over the Congress party and the Central Government. This time, I sincerely hope I am wrong. Only time will tell.