[Reader-list] Social status doesn’t give immunity to fiction-writer Arundhati Roy

[Aditya Raj Kaul]

*Social status doesn’t give immunity to Arundhati*
November 04, 2010   12:46:47 AM

*Amitabh Thakur*

*Just because Arundhati Roy is hailed as intellectual, law must not be
misinterpreted to legalize her act of sedition. Because no law permits such
transgression wrapped in pleas and rhetoric where its very foundation is
questioned*

Arundhati Roy needs no introduction in India or abroad. A Booker Prize
winner, she has over the period emerged as a social activist who has her own
perspectives and thoughts on many pertinent issues. More often than not,
these views get into lots of controversy. There are people who say that
these controversies turn into an advantage for Arundhati Roy, who always
comes up with larger number of fans and followers in the aftermath of each
such controversy.

Possibly following the same thing, in a meeting on Kashmir called “Azadi —
The Only Way” organised in LTG Auditorium, New Delhi, on October 21, she
along with SAR Geelani and Syed Ali Shah Geelani spoke words which clearly
come in the purview of sedition. She said, “Kashmir should get *azadi *from
*bhookhey-nangey * Hindustan … India needs *azadi *from Kashmir and Kashmir
from India. It is a good debate that has started. We must deepen this
conversation and am happy that young people are getting involved for this
cause, which is their future.” Similarly at a seminar on “Wither Kashmir:
Freedom or enslavement” held in Srinagar Arundhati Roy said, “Kashmir has
never been an integral part of India. It is a historical fact. Even the
Indian Government has accepted this.”

Now, we all know that Article 19(1)(a) of our Constitution provides right to
freedom of speech and expression to all its citizen but at the same time
Article 19(2) imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right
conferred by the said subclause in the interests of the sovereignty and
integrity of India, the security of the State etc. Similarly, section 121,
121A and 124A of the Indian Penal Code talk of waging, or attempting to wage
war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India and also
about sedition. Sedition is very clearly defined as an act “by words, either
spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise”
bringing or attempting to bring into hatred or contempt, or exciting or
attempting to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law
in India.

So far these laws remain very much in force in India. In fact, Article
19(2)(a) and section 124A of the IPC has been challenged many a times even
in the Supreme Court but the highest Court of the land has upheld it as
being constitutional and illegal. Thus, as ordinary citizen of India we are
duty bound to follow them. In case anyone of us have views divergent to the
above laws, we only have two options — either to get them amended in the
Parliament or to get them stuck down in the Court. None of these has been
done and hence it becomes the duty of a citizen to follow them in letter and
spirit. Or to face the legal consequences when we violate it. There is not
much genius required to understand this, this is simple logic.

Yes, we all have the right as human beings to have certain opinions and
views and also to firmly believe in them but when it comes to expressing
these views in the public domain, each one of us has to adhere to the law of
the land. There exists the paramountcy of law, as long as it exists in a
given format and no one, including Arundhati Roy can be considered to be
above law. And when the matter is related with the basic integrity and unity
of the nation, the seriousness of the matter increases manifold. This is
important because any laxity or relaxation on this account might act as a
motivating factor and precedence to others to take law in their own hands,
to the extent of playing with the nation’s very basic foundations. The
situation becomes all the more serious when the persons committing the crime
are considered among the respected members of the society and claim to be
intellectuals and thinkers in their own way.

I don’t need to explain why the words quoted above as being that of
Arundhati Roy fall under the purview of sedition. Can one think of any
nation which would allow open talks of its own dismemberment? When the very
basic foundation and existence of the country is lost, how can it cater to
its other required duties? So, just because Arundhati Roy is a celebrity and
has widely been hailed as an intellectual, do her illegal and
unconstitutional words become legalised?

After the matter became hotly discussed, Arundhati Roy is quoted to have
said that she said what millions of people here say every day. She says that
her speeches are fundamentally a call for justice and that she “spoke about
justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal
military occupations in the world”. She also blames someone (presumably
India) in the following words- “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”.

But do all these pleas and rhetoric make a crime, as defined in a law book,
as something else? Which law would permit such a transgression where it’s
very foundations are questioned? And if a person still feels that what he or
she is speaking is true, then another thing shall happen simultaneously —
the code of law shall be imposed in the most impassioned, efficient and
value-neutral manner, without thinking twice about who it is that is
violating the law. This is the basic criteria and definition of law that we
all understand and adhere to.

--*The writer, presently on study leave at IIM Lucknow, is an IPS officers
of UP Cadre.

Link -
http://www.dailypioneer.com/294261/Social-status-doesn%E2%80%99t-give-immunity-to-Arundhati.html
*