Here is a fundamental question to friends and supporters of Salman Rushdie: Is the right to speech and expression absolute, without any restrictions, in any democratic society? The right to freedom of expression is recognised as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of this right carries “special duties and responsibilities” and may “therefore be...
More »SEARCH RESULT
Salman Rushdie: Politicians in bed with extremists for electoral gains
-The Times of India Salman Rushdie, whose Jaipur Litfest video conference was cancelled on Tuesday, expressed disappointment that politicians are in bed with religious extremists groups and hence unwilling to oppose or stop them. "My overwhelming feeling is a disappointment on behalf of India, which is a country that I have loved all my life and whose long-term commitment to secularism and liberty is something I've praised for much of my life....
More »Rushdie Non Grata by David Remnick
The Jaipur Literary Festival, a giddily chaotic celebration of the written word set on the grounds of a Rajasthan palace, ended in misery and embarrassment today, with the organizers bowing to pressure from local security forces and scotching plans for Salman Rushdie to “appear” at the festival, finally, by video link. Rushdie had already been forced to cancel plans to come to Jaipur after he had received intelligence reports—bogus intelligence,...
More »Who’s afraid of Aadhar? by Pratap Bhanu Mehta
Indian public policy often short-circuits because there are too many crossed wires: one agency trying to do another’s work, and arguments being invoked in contexts in which they are inappropriate. There has been much speculation about the Ministry of Home Affairs’ objections to Aadhar in its current form. But it will be a travesty if the project of identification is moved from its current service delivery-oriented paradigm to a security-oriented...
More »Year of criticism, from the bench and against it by Krishnadas Rajagopal
Judicial activism was the key in many Supreme Court observations and judgments during 2011. 2011 CVC THOMAS: A three-judge bench led by CJI SH Kapadia declared “non est” — or nonexistent — the majority recommendation of a high-powered committee for P J Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner. The court ruled that the Prime Minister and the Home Minister’s recommendation amounted to “official arbitrariness”, coming in spite of the dissent of the third...
More »