FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Can you understand the pain one feels but can’t express? Can you comprehend the frustration one goes through when not being understood? Can you feel that aggression arises when your voice is being suppressed? That's how an oppressed feel and that’s what an oppressed want us to see. Whenever someone is being oppressed for a long time and reaches the threshold of forbearance, they revolt. Yes, they revolt and that’s how revolutions are born. The American Revolution of 1776, The French revolution of 1889, the Indian Independence of 1947, the Iranian revolution 1979, all these historical revolutions are the product of oppression by regimes. But we are very diplomatic people, we have nothing to do with History. We work according to our convenience. We use anything and everything to justify ourselves. We will use every sort of justification and narrative which works in our favour. But the Irony is the very same narratives which we use to justify ourselves is seen with much contempt when used by those who hold different opinions. Anything different is unacceptable and ultimately rejected. Is it hypocrisy or ignorance? Before indulging into broader issues, let me ask one thing- Are we giving that space and freedom to people to express their opinion in our personal life? Are we giving them the liberty to assert their own truth? If we can’t give that space at an individual level then how can we live in harmony in a nation with diverse opinions and perspectives? While watching the news this afternoon, I was stunned to watch how the anchor was manipulating people against minorities or those who question the status quo. Perhaps that anger made me write this piece. I really felt such deep pain and was wounded. I was shattered to see how a single person with biased views is impacting millions of people and filling hatred in their minds. I remember the words uttered by him full of hatred and bias notions that have no authenticity but I know masses have a herd instinct and can follow who so ever leads them. That’s what Hitler did. He knew the masses and took full liberty to influence them against Jews but what came out of it except atrocities and mass extinction of Jews? What made him commit suicide in the end? In-spite of having learned the lessons from history, we are not making use of it.”

As Michael Foucault says that the real reason for reading history should be to dig out the lessons in order to become better humans and to analyze where our ancestors were superior and where were they at fault. Hitler too felt that his race was in danger and that made him exercise cruelty at such a huge level. But ask yourself, Was Hitler right? Indeed he had a charismatic personality which helped him to grasp the attention of masses but did he possess integrity? Was he uprighted? Was he working for Nation or was he gratifying his own self created distorted vision? The anchor in the news channel was propagating hatred against a particular community, if this is allowed in Democracy on the name of Freedom of speech than why not everybody is allowed to exercise their freedom of speech? Why this freedom is confined to specific people or class? Why others are put under unlawful activities when they are also exercising their freedom of expression. Why this double policy is being adopted? Can we say George Orwell was right when he said, “All animals are equal but some are more equal". I know that the people booked under unlawful activities are considered to invoke violence and destabilize the structures. But is it the truth or is it a narrative? Have we tried to find the truth on our own? Or Are we listening to narratives of those people who are actually filling us with contempt for each other? To choose which narrative we want to believe is also freedom but am I or you are free enough to choose?

Free Speech and Expression is the lifeline of democracy that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. It is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 19 of the Indian constitution provides freedom of speech which is the right to express one’s opinion freely without any fear through oral, written, electronic, broadcasting press. Then Why people are censored for their different opinions? I know the freedom of speech and expression is not absolute, there are limitations and boundaries. In fact, John Stuart Mill in “On Liberty” suggests that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others”.But my question is- Is it really preventing harm? Or Is it leading to more violence? Jawans being killed are considered as a martyr and celebrated. Should we celebrate it or should we mourn for the loss of precious lives? In Jammu and Kashmir, we have seen the suspension of internet services for a long period and even now we have not been provided with 4g facilities- in-spite of rigorous demand and Kashmir being the worst sufferer - in the era when India is supposed to be digitalized. Why such Harsh state measures are used to inculcate fear among masses? Will it suppress their voices? Or Will it stimulate them more? If a dissent asserts his opinion or narrative, he is booked under UAPA then why the TV anchors who promote communal hatred not booked under UAPA? Why so much of biasness? Why these two people are seen in two different lights? Why one narrative is given utmost importance and the other is seen with contempt? As John Milton says in Areopagatica, “Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.” I am not saying that we should support any kind of action that might disturb the integrity of the Nation or destabilize its structure but yes it is equally unjust to suppress opposing opinions without understanding the cause behind such actions.

Suppressing the voices has never been a solution and history is the testimony of this fact. As Karl Marx said, “Contradiction is the salt of development”, so instead of categorizing them, there needs to be a platform to acknowledge their concerns and who knows we may find a solution too. All we need is to be empathetic enough to listen to different voices so that we can help each other in a better way. I will conclude my piece with Milton’s words, “Let her(truth) and falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth puts to the worse in a free and open encounter? Her confuting is the best and surest suppressing.”

Afshan Mirza

The author is an M.A in Literature from University of Jammu