The two important pillars of democracy

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Recently, a friend of mine referred me to an article, by a lawyer of the High Court of Chennai, which appeared in the 'Hindu'. When reading this article, I realized how vibrant democracy was in India.

I believe that one day, the two giants, who would compete for world economic power, would be from Asia. I reckon they would be India and China. At the moment, China is far ahead of India, but eventually, if China continues with its totalitarian Communist regime and does not reverse its process to that of logical conclusion, to that of a democratic form of Government, it would decay and yield its economic power to India.

With all the anti-Indian propaganda that India is a bully and is having hegemonic tendencies or in the least is striving to control its neighbours; Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and the Maldives, when these countries face a crisis, India has never come forward to help the Sri Lankan Government; In the present crisis, India's attitude is one which is against the Sri Lankan government;.

It was the Indian Government which nurtured the terrorists; Yet, with the vibrant and an active democracy which prevails in India, it would make me shift my fidelities to India first, before considering the other option.

The article in the 'Hindu' newspaper refers to the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution and strenuously protected by the Supreme Court of India.

The Supreme Court of India has jealously safeguarded these fundamentals, specially the freedom of expression and speech, which power hungry politicians try to curb through multifaceted campaigns to stifle these freedoms on the basis that they impede and stultify government policy and the will of the people, thereby impeding the progress of the country.

This article refers to the decision of the Supreme Court of India, where some Christian organizations appealed to the Court to countermand the order of the National Censor Board, which permitted the release of the controversial film 'Da Vinci Code'. This film, which had its premiere at the prestigious 'Cannes' Film Festival, was immediately denounced by many devout Catholics on the grounds that it undermined the faith in the Roman Catholic Church and badly damaged its credibility.

According to a British survey, conducted by a group of prominent Catholics, it was revealed that the film would twice as likely lead people to believe that Jesus Christ fathered children and four times as likely to believe that the conservative Catholic Group 'OPUS DEI' is a murderous sect.

The film Da Vinci Code was banned in Sri Lanka by the President on a request made by the Catholic Church.

The President had to make a Hobson's choice in this matter as he is a committed Human Rights activist and has strived to protect the freedom of expression. But, if he did not give in to the pressures of this group, the picture painted by opportunists, especially before the elections, which perceived, portrayed and demonized him as anti-Christian, pro-Buddhist and fundamentalist would have proven true.

Therefore, the President took the correct political decisions and acquiesced to the request of the Catholic Church by promptly banning the film.

To me, 'Da Vinci Code' as a film or a novel has little or no consequence. When I was introduced to Dan Brown's 'Da Vinci Code' in the USA, I mistook it to be a novel of great importance. Later, I found that it had sold millions of copies in the United States alone and that it portrayed the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene and that he sired children and the other convoluted theories about the 'Holy Grail'.

The book became controversial as many readers believed it was based upon true historical facts founded upon research.

Having read the book, I was greatly disappointed. It was a cheap, highly contrived mystery thriller, which would not have been discussed or reviewed or taken notice of by any serious critic, but for the fact that it discussed, and portended to unveil hidden facts based upon thorough research, which was contrary to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. But in fact, it was a book based upon contrived sensationalism, driven by dubious research with the gullible in mind. Naturally, the book sold millions for these reasons.

Therefore, even if the 'Da Vinci Code' was shown in Sri Lanka, it would not have had any effect on anyone. The believers would believe in their religion and non-believers would not have been perturbed by this highly contrived story about Jesus Christ.

The more important aspect is that though the Roman Catholic Church and other institutions protested, no one issued a 'fatwa' to kill the author. Though most Christians believed Dan Brown committed blasphemy, his sacrilegious account did not warrant a 'fatwa' as it was in the case of Ahamed Salman Rushdi for his 'Satanic Verse'.

Why harp on the ban which is a non-event in Sri Lanka. What was relevant to us was, the article and its reference to the Supreme Court of India, which has time and again reminded the politicians in power of the rights of the people enshrined in the Constitution and not to ever even entertain the thought that it would be partner to a decision to stifle these rights.

When State after State, in India, adopted on their own, to ban the film 'Da Vinci Code', the Catholic Church, in the belief that it may be shown at least in a few states, filed a writ in the Supreme Court of India to quash the decision of the National Censor Board.

When the petition was received by the Judges, of the Supreme Court, they posed one salient question.

That was, whether the petitioner could name one predominantly Christian country which had banned the 'Da Vinci Code'. In fact, the answer was that there was none.

It has to be noted with pride that most other Christian churches and other organizations, mostly in the West, reacted with commendable rectitude, equanimity, balance and poise in this issue. The Supreme Court of India held "The legitimate expression of views and ideas cannot be suppressed on the grounds of intolerance of others or of the existence of a hostile audience".

The Court quoted with approval and aplomb the words of US Jurist Benjamin "When men differ in opinion both sides ought equally to have the advantage to be heard in public .... the different views are allowed to be expressed by proponents and opponents not because they are correct or valid but because there is freedom in the country for expressing different views"

The writer to the 'Hindu' opines "My endeavour here is to highlight that banning of the film 'Da Vinci Code' is not only unconstitutional, illegal' but also imprudent. The tendency to approve or sanction unconstitutional acts to please group interests, even at the cost of violating constitutional mandates, is becoming a disgusting feature of governance. By and large, democracy has survived primarily on account of 'the eternal vigilance adopted by the other two pillars that support democracy - media and the judiciary".

As a Nation, which had been a monarchy for several centuries, the adoption of a democratic system or set up will continue to pose problems to the executive but within a very short period of time, our people with forethought adopted the Western style of democracy.

Our people cannot be blamed for having misused their franchise. They have elected and defeated politicians. One may say that democracy failed us. When countries like Singapore and Malaysia achieved economic independence and growth we have remained poor and undeveloped.

Nonetheless, we have a democracy which guarantees fundamental freedoms. Whenever a ruler strives to stifle the two main pillars of a democracy, the media and judiciary, people have rightly voted them out of office.

India would one day be democratic powerhouse like the USA. China, on the other hand, continues with the present Communist government and will falter and fall, as it does not have in place the two formidable pillars - the judiciary and the media, free of executive control.

One of the reasons why the United States has surpassed other nations, within a space of two hundred years, to become a world power is because of its democracy. Although, as a world power it coerces other nations into submission by threatening to bomb its cities to rubble, as confessed by the President of Pakistan, yet, with all its failings, it has a free media and a judicial system completely independent of the Executive.

Due to the freedoms guaranteed by the US Constitution, even the Mid Western States, which are known as the church belt, did not even entertain the thought of banning the 'Da Vinci Code'. The 'Da Vinci Code was banned mostly in non Christian countries.

What was most interesting to note was that the Chief Justice of Alabama Justice Roy Moore, unable to cope with the rising rate of crime, decided to install a monument in the Court house depicting the 'Ten Commandments'. It was a very popular move by an extremely popular judge. No citizen is against abatement of crime.

The monument reminded its citizens of the words of God. But, immediately the civil rights groups decided to protest on the basis that it was in conflict with the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. A district judge ordered the removal of the 5,000 pound monument. Chief Justice Moore refused.

Thereafter the ethics committee suspended and removed him from office.

He became a star and decided that God had chosen him to lead the American people to righteousness, and as a prelude contested to become the governor of Alabama and even the President of the US. The fundamentalists rallied behind him. But the Americans voted Roy Moore out.

He lost the primary election and with that came his downfall. He was also known as the Taliban of the Christians. Though his appeal to hold the moral law would attract the uninitiated, dilettante lower middle classes, even the republican voters rejected him at the primaries.

In the State of Gujarat, the BJP decided to bring an amendment to the anti-conversion statue making conversions between similar sects permitted. The minister said the bill clarified what conversion is. "If a Sunni wants to become a Shia, or a protestant becomes a Roman Catholic, it will not be considered conversion," he said. "Similarly, if a Hindu becomes a Buddhist or Sikh or Jain, it will not be treated as conversion.

Immediately, there were protests from Jains and Buddhists who vehemently oppose the concept that Hinduism is similar to Buddhism or Jainism. What was most refreshing to note was that most Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains have implicit faith in the Indian Supreme Court.

They believe whatever the state government adopts as an amendment to the controversial anti-conversion Bill; the Supreme Court of India would never permit such a narrow parochial amendment, brought at the behest of the BJP government.

The tyranny of the majority is opposed and kept under strict control by the Supreme Court of India. Otherwise India would have dismembered into several countries and internecine war would have been the order of the day.

The two important pillars of democracy; the media and the judiciary are a very much alive and kicking in India and its myriad industrious and IT growth will make India one of the biggest power blocs in Asia.

Your responses lagoshaka@gmail.com