By IndiaTomorrow.net,
New Delhi, 11 Jan 2015: The condemnable marauding attack on the French weekly Charlie Hebdo office in Paris on 7th Jan, apparently as revenge for caricature of Prophet Muhammad, has again sparked a hot debate over an old but vital issue Freedom of Speech. If limited freedom of speech will damage free democracies then unlimited freedom will remove terminology of Hate Speech from political discourses and law books for ever. IndiaTomorrow.net opens up its space for an academic and serious debate over the subject. We invite comments from our learned readers to [email protected] .
Some of our respected readers have sent their comments over the issue. We will publish them one by one on this page – Editor.
—–
Updated on 17 Jan 2015
“The Paris killings raise a vital question: Is the freedom of expression unlimited? Should one person’s right to say or write whatever he wants, be at the cost of the feelings of others? French and Danish cartoonists have regularly lampooned the Holy Prophet, often in a language that is dirty and sickening. A few years ago the French Government itself urged them not to carry a particular cartoon that was highly offensive to Muslims. Yet that magazine refused. The result was that French embassies in about twenty countries had to be closed down temporarily, for safety. Most non Muslims do not realise how strongly all Muslims feel about the Holy Prophet. Any gross insult to the Prophet is bound to produce a hostile reaction. One can understand a learned article on the Prophet, to which we may not agree. But to use foul and dirty language on the Prophet would be strongly resented.
I hope France and Denmark realize that religious icons, whether Christ, Mohammed or Buddha deserve a minimum respect and dignity in the media. Violence is counterproductive, but how do you hold back a community of 1.6 billion?”
J.S. Bandukwala
Vadodara, Gujarat
*****
“In light of the recent attack on Charlie Hebdo, an intense debate on freedom of expression has ensued. Some people have argued, though Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons were offensive, people in liberal democracies like France have the right to free speech, and therefore, an attack on Charlie Hebdo is an attack on our cherished liberal values.
Though I completely agree with the argument, we should not limit free speech just because somebody finds it offensive, I would like to point out that this right to free speech has limitations. Legally speaking, right to free speech does not extend to hate speech. There is no debate on that. If you take any liberal democratic country in the world, hate speech against a racial or ethnic group is considered to be a crime. For example, in France, like so many other countries, publishing anti-Semitic propaganda is a crime. Nobody can make the argument people should be allowed to preach hatred against Jews.
I believe Charlie Hebdo’s case is exactly the same. That is exactly how Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons should be seen as: hate speech, pure and simple. The magazine’s cartoon are not just offensive, they are offensive because they are racist and Islamophobic. No peace-loving liberal democratic society should stand for it.
The Charlie Hebdo tragedy could have been averted and so many innocent lives saved, if only the French State had seen Charlie Hebdo cartoons for what they were — hate speech against Muslims and their Arab-French minority — and had banned them in time.”
Khalid Jaleel
Research Scholar, Jamia Millia Islamia
New Delhi
*****
Freedom of expression, much like freedom of faith and conscience, is one of the most basic of human rights. It is a hallmark of secular democracies, even if theocracies, monarchies and dictartorships seem not to believe in them. There cannot be a justification for any restrictions on it, much less violent attempts to throttle such freedom. Having said that, targetted exercise of such freedoms so they verge on communalism, racism, casteism, even gender, could attract provisions of national and international laws in as much as they would infringe the fundamental rights of other citizens. I condemn the terror attack on CH, but I condemn it and show my solidarity for the freedom of expression in my own words, not in those of the late Editors of CH.
John Dayal
New Delhi
****
In the context of recent attack on French weekly Charlie Hebdo, once again the debate of freedom of expression has started. I think everyone has freedom of speech in democracy. But naturally this word “freedom” actually has certain limitation in it. Everyone has freedom to move their hand around but as soon as the chicks of other start your freedom stops. We should not give anyone a right to say anything wrong about any respected person. So the freedom of speech has certain limitation. The other thing is the reaction on the wrong doing of anyone. In Islam unwanted violence is prohibited. I think this attack is the work of anti-Islamic forces.
Dr Adnanul Haque Khan
PR Secretary, SIO Maharashtra, North Zone
Akola, Maharashtra
****
The French magazine Charlie Hebdo or for that matter the whole Western Society cannot hide their face in the white snow of the falsehood of freedom of expression. It is an old saying that “you are having full freedom to foist your fists but your freedom ends at a point from where the tip of my nose begins”. The problem with the west is that they are not ready to see the world beyond their nose and realise from where the nose of others begin to exist. Moreover, the claim of freedom of expression or humour of west loses its wits when the question of depicting any fun towards Holocaust is put forward. At that time they prefer to look at the face of Israel rather they are afraid of Mossad. Isn’t it? They need an introspection of their own mindset !
Imteyaz Husain
Bihar Sharif
