Most of us in India understand that there is a huge problem with
freedom of speech in India. India now
at the bottom of the world on freedom of speech. Here is some
interesting
on such facts.
For a sense of the zeitgeist, see
editorial and
Liang in the Economic Times.
on FirstPost reminds us that judges in India are not intellectuals
who will lead the way on this.
Public shaming
There are two ways through which things are getting better. The
first area of importance is public outrage. Even if India has laws
that hinder free speech, we should all speak up and establish social
norms in favour of free speech, where the use of existing laws that
support attacks on freedom of speech is just not done.
As an example,
embarked on legal bullying against one person, but backed away when
faced with outrage.
A splendid example of this push back is IIPM. Recent events (
should make IIPM regret having gone down this route. Speaking for me,
I have not accepted and will not accept invitations from IIPM for
speaking or writing in their publications, and I will be quite
circumspect about resumes that carry the name IIPM. (This is my
standard operating procedure for left tail organisations in India). If
enough of us do this, it will establish deterrence.
Outrage matters. We should be naming and shaming the offenders and
maintaining a hall of shame.
Fixing the laws
The real problem is
laws. Modifications are required -- large and small. We need to
shift away from proscribing defamation, obscenity, blasphemy to a
stance of supporting freedom of expression. Restrictions on freedom
implemented through government control on the Internet need to give
way to accepting freedom of the Internet. What is new in recent
months is that the outrage has bubbled up to the point where many
people are saying Let's go fix the laws:
- An excellent television
between Shashi Tharoor and Karan Thapar. -
Bhanu Mehta in the Indian Express talks about the unusual
response of Omar Abdullah and a delicious quotation from Manish Tewari. -
Mehta in the New York Times says that we must fix the
Constitution. - Jay
Panda, Lok Sabha MP, has begun working on private members bills
that will fix the laws.
Small modifications of the laws will constitute elements such as:
shifting defamation from criminal to civil liability, and having a
provision where costs are always paid to the defendant if the
accusation does not hold. Fundamental change will constitute fixing
the Constitution.
Conclusion
Capitalism and freedom reinforce each other. Both require the
ability to think (freedom of speech, freedom of thought) and the
ability to act (to vote, to transact, to conduct business, to
live). Achieving freedom requires pushing on both fronts -- on
establishing a vibrant and open `
for ideas' and on establishing freedom to act.
IIPM reminds us that apart from being a question of high ideas,
this is a question of simple consumer protection. When a person thinks
of getting a degree, he should have full information about the
choices, and IIPM is trying to block that information. Similarly,
consumer protection requires that for any publicly visible financial
product or service, there should be an unrestricted marketplace of
ideas, otherwise the ability of consumers to make wise choices is
impaired.
In the best of times, liberal democracies suffer from
little criticism. If we are to make progress on dealing with the
problems of
and runaway governments, the most important channel is high quality,
pointed, trenchant criticism. The present laws are grossly out of
touch with the principle of freedom of speech. We need to go fix
that: first as a matter of social custom, and then as a matter of
law. It appears that there is some movement on both fronts.