Of JNU, Afzal Guru & Sedition

The recent developments at the reputed Jawaharlal Nehru University have rather taken a ugly turn culminating in a scene of open confrontation between the students protesting (and perhaps ignorantly ) the arrest of their union president and the government of the day which has taken a firm stance against anti-national sloganeering on the campus.

To start with,the spectrum of the left wingers in India hardly wink an eye before calling the PM a mass murderer and a psychopath despite the highest of courts in India stating their verdict otherwise. Coming to the convicts like Yakub Memon, Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat, they have been found guilty in the acts of terrorism after a fair and honest judicial trial, a rare commodity in most of the so-called liberal, modern nations of the world. They, however, have been hailed as the voice of the oppressed and projected as martyrs subject to the most gruel tortures by the Indian establishment.

We can perhaps, attribute the criticism of the current PM as well as occasional outrage of the left lobby as a just way of exercising one’s freedom of speech and rightly so. The constitution does guarantee us this freedom of expression and which is something to be cherished.

However, there is a difference between the use of the right to free speech and the abuse of the right to free speech. It may seem logically defensible but if an individual’s expressions transcends the limits of reason in the way of supporting terrorists targeting the integrity and sovereignty of the country, then it is actionable –Period!

If a Kamlesh Tiwari could be framed under the National Security Act for defaming the Prophet ( thus offending a community),then is it wrong in arresting Kanhaiya Kumar, who in violation of university permissions has led a group that wants the disintegration of India? (thus offending the 125 crore populace of India) Perhaps, a fair legal action , isn’t it?

We must understand and appreciate that freedom of speech is not an absolute right – a quick reference to Article 19 of the constitution as well as section 124A of the IPC very lucidly state the various clauses attached to the same .

If one has objections with the judicial trials of the deceased terrorists, then it would be rather effective and civil, if the same are raised in a manner within the ambit of the constitution – in a parliamentary setup. Wishing for the country’s destruction coupled with a blatant war cry (The “Jung Rahegi” rhetoric) is simply far-fetched and uncalled for.

With the rise of the Right in the country, it is about time the Left up its ante and focus on constructive nation building rather than vitiate the atmosphere by building pompous hyperbole at a critical juncture in the history of the Indian republic.

Hope to have a meaningful, Budget session, March 2016.

Of JNU, Afzal Guru & Sedition

The recent developments at the reputed Jawaharlal Nehru University have rather taken a ugly turn culminating in a scene of open confrontation between the students protesting (and perhaps ignorantly ) the arrest of their union president and the government of the day which has taken a firm stance against anti-national sloganeering on the campus.

To start with,the spectrum of the left wingers in India hardly wink an eye before calling the PM a mass murderer and a psychopath despite the highest of courts in India stating their verdict otherwise. Coming to the convicts like Yakub Memon, Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat, they have been found guilty in the acts of terrorism after a fair and honest judicial trial, a rare commodity in most of the so-called liberal, modern nations of the world. They, however, have been hailed as the voice of the oppressed and projected as martyrs subject to the most gruel tortures by the Indian establishment.

We can perhaps, attribute the criticism of the current PM as well as occasional outrage of the left lobby as a just way of exercising one’s freedom of speech and rightly so. The constitution does guarantee us this freedom of expression and which is something to be cherished.

However, there is a difference between the use of the right to free speech and the abuse of the right to free speech. It may seem logically defensible but if an individual’s expressions transcends the limits of reason in the way of supporting terrorists targeting the integrity and sovereignty of the country, then it is actionable –Period!

If a Kamlesh Tiwari could be framed under the National Security Act for defaming the Prophet ( thus offending a community),then is it wrong in arresting Kanhaiya Kumar, who in violation of university permissions has led a group that wants the disintegration of India? (thus offending the 125 crore populace of India) Perhaps, a fair legal action , isn’t it?

We must understand and appreciate that freedom of speech is not an absolute right – a quick reference to Article 19 of the constitution as well as section 124A of the IPC very lucidly state the various clauses attached to the same .

If one has objections with the judicial trials of the deceased terrorists, then it would be rather effective and civil, if the same are raised in a manner within the ambit of the constitution – in a parliamentary setup. Wishing for the country’s destruction coupled with a blatant war cry (The “Jung Rahegi” rhetoric) is simply far-fetched and uncalled for.

With the rise of the Right in the country, it is about time the Left up its ante and focus on constructive nation building rather than vitiate the atmosphere by building pompous hyperbole at a critical juncture in the history of the Indian republic.

Hope to have a meaningful, Budget session, March 2016.