T’gana CM’s one more neta whose views on free speech are unmoored from Constitution
Women, and men too, are “stripped and paraded” with sickening regularity in this country. It’s a crime as old as mobs, calculated to crush victims and their families with shame. Enough Indians still remember the backstory of 1981’s Behmai massacre. But Telangana CM Revanth Reddy seemingly wants to write this “punishment” into statute. Addressing the state assembly on Saturday, he warned that anyone “commenting on women in my family” would be stripped and paraded. A sitting CM – sworn to “bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India” – endorsing crimes as punishments is deeply troubling. Not less so when he puts “my family” above the state.
In trying to project himself as a strongman, Reddy has done his state’s people a terrible disservice, as mobs will feel emboldened to dispense their brand of justice. He’s also done a great disservice to the cause of free speech – guaranteed by the Constitution but constantly attacked by the political class and police. Reddy’s angry because two women YouTubers posted a video in which interviewees abused his family and him. They were arrested on March 12. Ideally, there should have been a defamation case, not an arrest. But Reddy wasn’t even satisfied with arrests. He seems to be using the case as a pretext to muzzle individuals “posing as journalists”. He wants media organisations to define the word “journalist”, and submit lists of those who qualify. “Others will be treated as criminals…”
Indian law does not privilege journalists over other citizens in the matter of free speech. Everybody has a right to have their say, with “reasonable restrictions”, which range from decency and defamation to friendly relations with foreign states. Some of these restrictions are questionable. But that threat to free speech pales before the one posed by police action, which is often prodded by politicians. Circumstances under which free speech can be restricted can only be determined by application of judicial thought. And cases where police action can start are determined only by the Constitution’s list of ‘restrictions’, not by complaints of neighbours or by outrage of moralists or by anger of politicians.
This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
END OF ARTICLE
