Research Paper Topic : Article 19
Author : Shreya Gopi, Intern at Student of the BAR, Student of Sarada Vilas Law College, Mysore.
Editor: Vidya Puthran, Student of the BAR.
INTRODUCTION:
The Constitution of India provides the right of freedom, given in Article 19 with the view of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of the constitution. The right to freedom in Article 19 guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, as one of its six freedoms. Indian Constitution gave the power to express opinions freely by the words, writing or printing pictures or any other mode. It also includes the expression of one’s idea through any communication medium or visible representation such as gesture sign.
Article – 19 gave these wings to fly -
• Freedom of speech and expression
• To assemble peacefully and without arms
• To form association or union
• To move freely throughout the territory of India
• To reside and settle in any part of territory of India
• To practice any profession, to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
Article 19 helps the individual to express their feelings and discover the truth. It gives the opportunity to the individual to participate in the decision making of administration. It provides the mechanism by which it would be possible to establish reasonable balance between the stability and social change. These rights of freedom gave opportunity to assemble peacefully to achieve an objective and to form association for their wellbeing. Citizens of India can freely move and reside anywhere in the India and carry out any profession or do any business. But all these freedoms are not absolute, every freedom has its own restriction.
Freedoms acts as power to carryon the life as we want to, but unlimited use of power may harm another citizen or even themselves. The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins. Therefore, freedom is limited, person should use that within his circle. Indian constitution doesn’t give absolute freedom to its citizen instead it restricts them with a view to protect the public at large.
REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS-
• Security of the state
• Friendly relation with the foreign state
• Public order
• Decency or morality
• Contempt of court
• Defamation
• Incitement of an offence
• Sovereignty and integrity of India.
ARTICLE 19 (1) (a) : FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION:
According to Patanjali Shastri, “freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organization’s without free political discussion no public education so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible”.
Freedom of speech and expression also includes publication, before it was newspaper, magazines now it is also on social media platform. One can express his opinion on the matter to the limited extent but it should not insult anyone.
According to Mansfield “it consisting in printing without any license subject to the consequences of law”. It means the liberty of press means liberty to print and publish what one please without previous permission.
Now a days more than newspaper or magazines, social media’s like Facebook, Twitter are the platforms to express our opinion.
Recent example on this topic is Prashant Bhushan’s case. Prashanth Bhushan is an advocate, attorney general of India. Government of India initiated the contempt of Court proceedings against Bhushan for his tweet, which was related to appointment of CBI
chief. Later, however the attorney general of India sought to withdraw the proceeding, indicated that the comments had been a “genuine mistake” by Bhushan.
Second time supreme court of India, held that Bhushan was guilty of contempt of court in relation to two post made by him on twitter. First post was a criticism of the role played by the previous four chief justices of India and second was on photograph of Chief justice of India because he was sitting on his bike without mask while the court was lockdown during covid-19 pandemic in India.
Justice Arun Mishra, writing for the bench held that, these tweets were not just personal opinions and that they tendered to “shake the public confidence in the institution of judiciary”.
In spite of this, Prashanth Bhushan stood for his view. During the preceding the attorney general of India had objected SCC, noting that contempt of court proceedings required his consent which had not been obtained in this case.
The supreme court declined to hear him and initially published an order, that did not record his appearance although it was later amended to correct the error. On 31st august 2020, the supreme court fined him 1/- and he paid on the same day.
Yes, the Constitution gave a power of freedom to citizen but we should use that with reasonable restriction.
There is a saying in Sanskrit “Maunam Sammathi Lakshanam”, means silence indicates acceptance. Freedom of speech and expression also includes silence, our constitution has given freedom to talk it doesn’t mean that one should talk, they can choose to be silent too.
In National Anthem case, supreme court held children’s expulsion from the school was a violation of their fundamental right under article 19(1)(a) which also includes the freedom of silence.
Unlike other freedoms, freedom of speech and expression applies to prisoners. Prisoners can speak and express their opinion about their wants and needs. In a landmark case jail authorities denied the journalist and videographer to interview the prisoner. Prisoners contended that it is deprivation freedom of speech and expression. They added that they are also citizens of India so they have this freedom. Court observed that permission to interview the trail prisoners cannot be given automatically. The court while granting permission will have to weigh the competing interest between the right of press and right of authorities prohibiting such interview. (M. Hassan v. Government of Andra Pradesh)
Therefore, Freedom of speech and expression in itself has unique features which makes Article 19 more alluring yet powerful.
Comments