According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, freedom of expression is the right of every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers – The way FOE is defined, and is widely accepted by MOST civil.

In India too, Under Constitution, We Indians also have the right of Freedom Speech, under Sec. 19; however, the addition of “with reasonable restriction” in the sub-clause mired the entire effort. I shall not dwell in the constitutionality or the idea behind this Sec much for now, instead shall focus on another lesser addressed issue.

Freedom of Expression is a much wider concept and one of the most important right bestowed upon human beings. However the phrase is less understood and even lesser is used in implementation, and thus FOE is more often abused and misused by all and sundry, including even those who swear by it to uphold this right, may be unintentionally or otherwise or to avoid uncomfortable analysis / position; or to hide the inner hypocrisy … whatever be the individual reason.

Confusing Preferential Fight between Identity and Faceless: – While the Law has conferred right of Freedom of Speech/Expression to Individual (citizens), and in current law *with reasonable restrictions*, however, this sub-clause is more often use by faceless group to attack right of individual, given by the state. Ironically, even the state, follows more the merrier, in most cases if not all. Funnily, the evaluation of the sample size of this group, which claims to represent the X community, Gender, select citizens are not been known. Violent the Group, faster is *reasonable restriction* is allowed and individual right is suppressed, if not crushed. This urge is not limited to law makers alone, but also to self-claimed opinion makers of the society, and so called liberals.

Else why, the Democratic Front Government Led by Congress along with Javed Akhtar and his ilks, snatched away the right of an Individual, from a woman Constable, who wrote a Poem, expressing her anguish on what she experienced while controlling Islamic Mob rioters, famously known as “Azad Maidan Riots”. There has been many cases of Individual Right of Freedom been snatched away, and it is prevalent across board, through all religion and gender, only need is for them, to be more than an individual, claim to be group, know few higher ups or opinion makers, and voila, this set of violent idiots can brutalized the freedom given to Individual. It’s very important to mention, many also uses the legal means to express their anguish, and not always the group is violent. Many Hindu Organisations did seek Judiciary intervention in case of M. F. Hussain’s Painting and Few other cases. (Here, I would like to mention, violent approach by fringe over M. F Hussain was undertaken, and it is condemned).

Thus a closer look has to be brought upon and difficult decision has to be made, of safeguarding Individual right as against Faceless Group using Violent threat to get their illegitimate or otherwise Egoist demand get prevalence over constitutional right. This discussion also brings about the question, why friction over expression and should Freedom of Expression is so sacrosanct, that it can’t be touched. While surely it is, but…. Next Point

Freedom of Expression used to Crush Freedom of Expression:- Statement may sound confusing or oxymoron at first glance, but it is not so, if closer look at events related to Freedom of Expression are analyzed. While it is true, that everyone has or must have Freedom of Expressing their opinion, howsoever weird it is, and in India it has been tradition (from whatever limited I have been exposed through reading) questioning / inquisitiveness is always respected. India is a Land, where even God is questioned and compelled to reply. Our Dharma, supports continuous improvisation and adjustment, there is no final word; and thus no blasphemy. it allows all kind of questions and even mockery, thus giving space to debate, which has been strength of our Dharma, and provides greater understanding. A Question can never be Blasphemy, at least not in INDIA, It always is a medium to get in deeper understanding and  explore unknown quarters.

Freedom of Expression should not have “reasonable restriction”, but should certainly have responsibility on Individual/Group who has expressed to stand for what is expressed, or the least have courtesy to follow up by explaining to the question (if any, but civilised) arose post expression. An expression which does not follows up or replies to queries, is Anti Freedom of Expression in itself. A phrase FOE can’t be used to absolve or seek exoneration from evaluation of the statement / expression meant. Debate is the soul of FOE, and when debate in form questioning a speech is BLOCKED, it is nothing but an anti-FOE.

In India, there is a novel problem in FOE discussion, hypocrisy of self-claimed torch bearers of FOE, especially from lutyen’s, elite class or liberals, who decide upon whether to support FOE or not depending upon the aggrieved party (which is more so decided upon religious lines, Sadly).

Most recent example, a Movie PK which was found questioning/mocking traditions of Hindu Faith was hugely supported by liberals with sound advice given to those offended, to grow up and be mature, not once there was call for debating the issue or seeking a alternate view. However, When certain French magazine was not only attacked but its editor and employees were killed because magazine had published cartoons, the same lot of FOE torch bearers, went in U-turn, trying to justify MURDER, yes MURDER and now they started giving sermons to editors and cartoonist to be sensitive towards the totalitarian view of ISLAMIST.

There are many such examples of self claimed opinion makers who themselves have molested the very FOE, Liberals claim to guard depending upon their comfort and fear and relation with either expresser or aggrieved party. This also exposes hypocrisy of so called liberals to holding torch for Freedom of Speech, but is more than eager to give it away in favor of Violent Faceless Group.

A Freedom of Expression, without right to offend is useless and serves no purpose, completely agree, however, Corollary to Right to Offend, is also Right to be Offended. Right to be Offended is as important as is Freedom of Expression, or rather it is another form of FOE, which in no manner can be suppressed. Any reaction suppressed to original statement is also attack on FOE. Not allowing reaction and a possible debate, does injustice to the very principle of Freedom of Speech

However, In India, mostly attention seeking self claimed seculars will push their attention seeking urge in form of controversial statement or in form of art, by way of movies or play (to the extent even compromising Historical Facts, without appropriate disclaimers) under garb of opinion, and when in civilized manner, the explanation is requested, the request of explanation is branded as attack on FOE. Wrong notions and lies can’t be allowed to spread in disguise of FOE, and hence debate be allowed. What can be said and how can right be protected of expression, if owner itself is not sure of the backing of statement. It’s only when the Expresser doesn’t permit any discussion on his point, and he/she claims that his/her statement be treated sacrosanct and not be under any analysis, else blasphemy, vitiates the matter, few selects civil legal route and fringe goes to violent route (not justifying violence, even remotely). Freedom of Expression gets its real meaning and value only debate is allowed in civilized manner, as the debate in itself will also take care of “Right to be offended”, corollary of Right to Speech or Express.

Above discussed points are just one more angle, and not in totality of FOE. Thus Freedom of Expression to be protected without on its merit and not how many are opposite of the idea; lastly FOE has to be responsible, not in sense of NOT hurting anyone, but Responsible in allowing and following up with the debate (if any) arises out of his/her expression.

Lastly, The post doesnt advocate any means of BAN of the Hypocrite Lutyens, rather pushes and calls for fair debate on any point of discussion, But EXPOSES the Hypocrite Liberals are one who thwarts FOE, which can be regained, by pushing and calling for platforms to accommodate arguments and counters.