The creation, delimitation and expansion of the domain of the sacred is always a political (and not merely theological) exercise to create barriers of defiance for entrenched power.
Though each generation has struggles, but even in democracy, writers face threats from political and religious followers when they try to keep different narrative of lives. Due to different ideas, there came the concept of democracy and freedom, yet people do not understand it.
For writers and artists the freedom of
expression is compromised often due to mob pressure.
The Brhamastra – Section 295A
The most misused section of Indian Penal Code
(IPC) where unnecessary hurt of religious sentiments shush the voices of
writers and artists. Section 295 A is a blasphemy law. Blasphemy is considered
as an act of insulting to religion, or sacred things associated with religion. In present day divorces are allowed, and
violence against women is not allowed, which is originally against religious
and cultural sentiments.
Blasphemy and Human Rights contradictions
There are various practices in every part of
the world, which are regressive, scientifically harmful and meaningless yet in
the name of custom and religion those are practiced.
When activist try to bring reforms, in highly orthodox
societies, they are treated badly. In some part of the world, social reformers
even get death penalties. Genital Mutilation is the best example of it. Even
when United Nations declared a day against female genital mutilation, but it happens.
For Male genital mutilation, even United Nation did not interfere because it is
the essential for ‘Sunni Muslims’.
Blasphemy Laws were introduced by highly
religious orthodox communities in primitive societies. The regret is that
blasphemy laws are in the laws in 21 century as well. Some
countries use Blasphemy laws as hate speech laws.
In both cases, the attack is for the people
who criticize religion.
The question is- Raja Ram Mohun Roy stood
against Sati Pratha in which women were burnt alive with husbands, and that
could have also called blasphemy. At that time perhaps it was blasphemy but
there was a little scope for criticism.
Criticism is the basic part of evaluation, how
can religion be away? On the grounds of humanity, there remain certain
practices which need to be abandoned and removed.
Acts
in India against Blasphemy
The
Indian Penal Code (Punjab Amendment) Bill, 2018, mooted and passed by the
Government of Punjab seeks to amend Article 295-A to make the sacrilege of the
Guru Granth Sahib, Koran, Bible and Bhagavad Gita a punishable offence
attracting life imprisonment.
International
Example of ‘Blasphemy Laws”
The progressive strengthening of anti-blasphemy laws during the
Seventies was a sign of a toxic combination of greater intolerance and
authoritarianism.
The
argument that the state needs to use coercive power in deference to religious
sentiments is illiberal.
September 30th is International Blasphemy Day. On this day in
2005, the day Danish papers published cartoons of Muhammed. Riots ensued and
100+ people were killed. Today blasphemy is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia,
an ally of the U.S.A and in many more countries.
Attack on secularism
Such
legislations as was passed in Punjab and mob pressure can lead to other states
to ‘accept’ the demands of different communities and groups. Such legislation
would hinder the possibility of the immanent critique of religious/community
practices, beliefs, and norms, as blasphemy laws strengthen the position of the
dominant within the community by accepting their interpretation as
authoritative.
Such
legislation indicates to the extremist and vigilante groups that their actions
have the state’s backup.
Legal
protection for the text in the domain of the sacred, even as hate speech
and hate crimes against human individuals and collectives go unabated and
unpunished, is a definite indicator of the extent of erosion of the secular
principle in polity and society.
Shashi
Tharoor’s Bill
Shashi
Tharoor introduced a private member bill aimed at protecting literary freedom
from threats, where he targeted three Sections of IPC – 295A, 298 which is
similar to 295A. 298 criminalizes speech critical of religious organisation or
religious figures.
According
to 153A, punishment is for them who promote enmity between groups on ground of
religion, race and language, therefore section 295A and 298 are hindrance in
the way of freedom of expression. 153B criminalizes words and imputation
prejudicial to nation’s integration.
Private
member bill is hard to pass but this is a needed law and abstains from the
manipulation of majority orthodox. Many authors were banned for example – Wendy
Doniger for ‘The Hindu: An Alternative History’, Salman Rushdie for Satanic
Verses, and Tamil writer Perumal Murugan for Madhorubagan.
Authors must be given the freedom to express their work without fear
of punitive actions by the state or the section of society to uphold liberal
values.
