Has Booker Prize offered Arundhati Roy a liberty to rise above law?

By Chaudhary Sandeep Datta

The Government of India looks justified in upto an extent by not letting the popularity monger writer Arundhati Roy gain the so called ‘Kashmiri martyrs’ status be geeting arrested under sedition law.

It’s a common knowledge that such moves by authorities, even if it may include slapping a case against them, only serves to such persons’ pre-set personal objectives.

Painter M.F.Hussain who made naked drawings of Hindu Goddesses, Bangladesh writer Tasleema Nasreen giving an inflammatory description of situation in her native country, and Salman Rushdie insulting the Koran through Satanic Verses have been a few such popular examples in the recent past.

Arundhati seems to be treading the same path to achieve controversy-driven fame. Such individuals are well aware of their unofficial ‘liberty’ that protects them from Government action for a long time, if not forever. As they are in regular notice of the world of the intellectuals, who are always ready to lend ‘support’ to such ‘voices of revolt’ at the drop of hat.

But the educated class of the country and the information-seekers across the world need to know what the Man Booker Prize winner novelist Arundhati Roy is doing by such a liberty granted as the Freedom to Speech and Expression to all Indian citizens under Article 19 (A) of the Constitution of India.

Despite high concerns over writer Arundhati Roy’s ‘call for justice’ speech delivered in Delhi recently, it looks she is hard bent on provoking the minds of the people in Kashmir to break free from India and patting them on their back for indulging in stone pelting against security forces.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone if a group of such provoked minds end up becoming militants or going on burning more public or private buildings.

Roy, who was in Srinagar till last reports about were received, once again attempted to dare the Central Government and its powers to control the voice that indirectly provokes and hails people seeking disintegration of States.

Roy, who has been vociferously advocating the cause of Kashmiris and other minorities in India minced no words in accusing New Delhi of waging war against minorities.

“In Nagaland, the troopers have been targeting Adivasis, in Telangana Dalits and in Punjab, they target Sikhs. India is an upper caste Hindu state that is certainly at war with minorities. It has waged a protracted war in Nagaland and Kashmir to force inclusion of people into its system,” The Kashmir Observer quoted Roy as saying on October 24.

Provoking the local people against Indian establishment further, Roy stated that Kashmiris recruited in the army and paramilitary forces are being used to suppress the voices of dissent in the Northeast and other states. “I was heart broken when I saw Kashmiri BSF personnel in Dantewada. Mothers in Nagaland recalled their kins who were posted in army and other security agencies. I urge Kashmiris to ensure that they are not used to as tools of suppression,” the report stated Roy as saying.

Hailing the role of Kashmiri women in the ongoing movement, Roy asked them to contribute to the struggle in one way or the other. “Kashmiris have been breathing and inhaling through the barrel of AK 47.”

She was speaking at a seminar in Srinagar on “Whither Kashmir? Freedom or Enslavement” organised by the Coalition of Civil Societies.

Roy, during the seminar, said that the Indian state was mimicking colonial powers in its policy of divide and rule, and had launched a protracted war in Kashmir.

An outspoken critic of corporate narratives of events and issues, Roy said that India was a cage in which millions of people of different nationalities were held against their will.

“I believe Kashmir is not an integral part of India. It is a historical fact,” Roy said, hailing stone-pelting youth “for taking the Kashmir movement to a decisive phase.”

While provoking youngsters, Roy said that the events of the past four months had changed the opinion in India. “The people of India are now showing a willingness to talk Kashmir,” she said. “This, in my opinion, is the greatest achievement of the past four months.”

“Resistance is a beautiful thing. It is high time for Kashmiris to set goals for Azadi and steer the movement,” she said, adding: “Your struggle has raised the consciousness about the Kashmir dispute and the oppression you face. But you must decide what type of society you have in mind once you are allowed to decide your future.”

“Kashmiris will have to make a choice whether or not they want Indian oppression to be replaced by a future corporate oppression,” Roy stated.

After reading her reported statements in Srinagar, one tends to question if winning a coveted prize allow a person in India to rise above law? Perhaps, Arundhati would have met with a different fate at the hands of law had she been in China. Long live Indian democracy!
--
Regards
Chaudhary Sandeep Datta

Shouldn't Geelani, Arundhati face sedition case?

By Ch. Sandeep Datta

It looks Hurriyat conference chief Syed Ali Shah Geelani and writer Arundhati Roy are not just running after international limelight with their anti-India rehetoric but, of late, have directly attempted to add fuel to the fire by provoking annoyed or dejected people in other parts of the country to develop disaffection for the Indian Government in the disguise of 'call for justice'.

Both of the individuals may have their 'compulsions' or ambitious reasons to provoke public sentiments against the Government establishment and India, such efforts need to be viewed as intentional attempt to break the country.

As such persons are well aware of the group of 'intelligentsia' who will always stand up for such 'voices', even if they lead to lead to violence or spread hatred among different sections of the society in the country.

In the last few months, by advocating Jammu and Kashmir's separation from India through inflammatory speeches in the Valley and hogging limelight internationally as 'the actual voice' of Kashmir, and for being the main mind behind the recent three-month long stone-pelting protests in Kashmir Valey, the separatist leader Geelani has certainly dared the Indian establishment.

Geelani, who is viewed as Pakistani agent, is a well-known separatist leader who seeks Kashmir be separated from India's reach of constitutional powers.

But Arundhati is comparitively a newcomer as 'Kashmiri activist'. Having gained attention of literratti since winning the Booker Prize for fiction, Roy associted herself to Narmada Bachao Andolan-led by noted social activist Medha Patkar and then temporarily shifting to Naxals' cause, has suddenly developed love for Kashmir's separatists.

It may be foolhardy to believe that Syed Ali Shah Geelani and writer Arundhati Roy, who gave some speeches recently in the capital seeking freedom of Kashmir and boycott of the Central Government appointed three-member team of interlocuters on Jammu and Kashmir, were not aware that they were inviting a serious trouble for themselves. And, they did what they did in full awareness of the law of the land and the 'Freedom of Speech' limitation.

Arundhati Roy’s questioning of the union of Kashmir with India is highly objectinable. It would be soft-mindedness of the Government agencies if they think a writer of her acclaim is not aware of Indian law.

As per Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 124A which deals with Sedition cases, "Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards. the Government established by law in [India], shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.

It explains -The expression "disaffection" includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity,

"Comments" expressing disapprobation of the measures of the attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.

Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.

Roy, a Booker Prize-winning author, said at a seminar in New Delhi on Sunday that "Kashmir has never been an integral part of India -- it is a historical fact. Even the Indian government has accepted this."

The government is expected to seek the law ministry’s view on registering a case of sedition against Roy and hardline Kashmiri separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani for their speeches. The Home Ministry had earlier referred their speeches made at the seminar to the police for appropriate legal action last week. The ministry move was made public after the BJP leader Arun Jaitley accused the government of “looking the other way”.

Agreed, everyone has been given freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right in the Indian Constitution. And, Ms. Arundhati spoke in the national capital under that 'right.' But should others be also allowed to have their say in the best possible way or limit they find their freedom of speech stretches to.

Should any other public call given to declare her 'persona non grata' by throwing her out of India or ending her citizenzip or public condemnation of her by all colleges, institutes and burning of her books, or unofficially declaring her as 'enemy of the country for making attempts to disintegrate the unity of the country by supporting Naxals and the latest stone pelting Kashmiris will also not fall into that category.

Wouldn't anybody's public all to blacken such a person' face and burning her effigies outside every educational institute and seminar in which she dares to participate henceforth may also be 'justified' by the same definition of Freedom of Speech.

Of course, people need to also take care of not taking law into their hands. But launching of a national 'Thu-Thu' or spit campaign may also help her for the same cause and also satisfy the patriotic mind or the families of every such jawan who is either fighting at the border or has achieved martyrdom due to such sympathisers' 'call for justice' to break India.

The so called intellectuals coming in her support, including a prominent newspaper considered as the Bible of Journalism by this writer too, may also like to see such writers through the prism of a person's greed to seek popularity for personal gains or probability to receive something in lieu of such an act. The need of the hour for the country is to evaluate the effect of such acts to peace or situation in other disturbed or sensitive areas of the country and revisit the interpretation of such a freedom's cost to all.

It may be noted the Fundamental Rights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has the right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality.

The Fundamental Rights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has the right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality.