Thursday, August 22, 2013
Crowd censoring - The Hindu
Crowd censoring - The Hindu
Tamil nationalist groups are again displaying an intolerant streak. They want Madras Café, a film loosely based on the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, to be banned because it shows the Tamil Eelam struggle in Sri Lanka in a poor light. Though the Madras High Court has rightly declined to stay the release of the film, some groups seeking to ban the film are readying themselves to create a law and order problem as a form of protest. That apprehension of law and order disruptions cannot be grounds for banning a film is settled law and has been upheld repeatedly by the Supreme Court of India. In its judgment in S. Rangarajan v Jagjivan Ram involving the film Ore Oru Gramathile, in 1989, the court was unequivocal that “freedom of expression cannot be suppressed on account of [the] threat of demonstration and processions or threats of violence.” The right to freedom of speech and expression is enshrined in the Constitution, and chauvinist elements, no matter of what hue, should not be allowed to infringe on this right citing some imagined slight to a group or community. The onus is on the State government and its policing arm to act against those attempting to disrupt law and order. Whether the film is good or bad, whether it is fact or fiction, all these have nothing to do with the right to freedom of expression of the film-makers and artistes.
Of late, film-makers and distributors have been organising special screenings for representatives of groups or communities who apprehend that the film could be offensive to their sensibilities. In Tamil Nadu, the government appears to have encouraged such groups by banning the film Dam 999 and seeming sympathetic to those wanting a ban on Vishwaroopam. The Central Board of Film Certification is the only competent body to censor a film, and once cleared by the board, no film should again have to be subjected to “clearance” from groups claiming to have been offended by it. Chauvinist elements are emboldened when a government adds to the pressure on the film-makers, instead of getting tough on those threatening to disturb law and order. Too often, the producers are forced to compromise and agree to cuts rather than risk prolonging the release of the film. When the government does not stand up for freedom of speech and expression, film-makers, distributors and exhibitors think it is safer to buy peace with the chauvinist groups. It would reflect very poorly on the administrative capabilities of the Tamil Nadu government if the film is withheld from exhibition for fear of violence. As for those who wish to protect their fragile sensibilities from being hurt in any manner, how’s this for a really simple remedy? Don’t see the movie.
The withering - Indian Express
The withering - Indian Express
Neither government nor opposition seems to have stakes in Parliament's functioning.
On Tuesday, the House was convulsed by agitation over the missing files on coal block allocation. But nobody seems to have noticed that Parliament has been missing in action, session after session now. It adjourns several times a day, only to fold up and give itself another break. This paralysis is now unremarkable, barely worth a mention. The standstill is not about specific issues any more. It doesn't implicate one or two parties alone, but the assumptions of deliberative democracy, Parliament's very worth as an institution of debate, accountability and oversight.
Parties of the opposition, especially the BJP, have taken parliamentary non-cooperation to the extreme, escalating every issue, starting with the 2G controversy in 2010 and sustaining that shrill pitch ever since, for matters large and trivial. Entire sessions have been lost to this obstructionism. It is almost as if the primary opposition party believes it is never coming back to power — so heedless does it appear of the consequences of entrenching this precedent. But the government is also responsible for this parliamentary drift. It is its duty to ensure legislative business, but this government has neither the will nor the skill to see its plans through. It cannot muster the minimal presence needed to enact its own showpiece legislation, the food security bill, one it was forced to ram through as an ordinance. Important reforms in pension and insurance are hanging in the balance. Whenever a matter assumes political weight, whether it is one of corruption, or a contentious piece of reform, or even a polarising decision like statehood to Telangana, the impulse is to abandon Parliament and posture in television studios or social media instead. The legislature loses the chance to grill the executive, extract answers, reconcile contradictions and help the country move on.
Parties do seem dimly aware of the problem, and the collective loss of face this entails. Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari called an all-party meeting to discuss these recurring disruptions, and several suggestions were made, from the possibility of shifting Question Hour and Zero Hour to giving smaller parties greater voice. There may be a case for these changes, but in the present circumstances, they will be rendered cosmetic. They do not address the core problem — how to make sure that partisanship, conflict and competition, which indeed drive politics, do not destabilise Parliament, the highest forum to forge consensus. It may be time to consider how opposition parties can express disagreement and grievance more regularly without resorting to a no-confidence motion that may be set up to fail. Right now, neither government nor opposition is invested in the functioning of the Houses. This undermining of Parliament is not a matter of tactics, or a session or two. Disrespect for institutional decorum has lingering effects, and is likely to haunt the next government as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)