NEW DELHI: Renowned author Arundhati Roy, celebrated for her Booker Prize-winning novel, faces prosecution in India over a speech she delivered 13 years ago regarding the occupied region of Kashmir. The move to prosecute Roy was initiated after a social activist from Kashmir filed a police complaint in 2010, following speeches made by Roy and three others at a conference organized by a human rights group.
In the speech, Roy, a vocal critic of India’s policy in occupied Kashmir, reportedly asserted that the disputed Himalayan territory was not an integral part of India. The complainant accused her of promoting enmity, leading to the legal action.
Under Indian law, prosecution for specific offenses, including hate speech, sedition, and promoting enmity, requires permission from the state government. In this case, Vinai Kumar Saxena, the federally-appointed lieutenant-governor (LG), granted permission to Delhi Police to prosecute Roy and Central University of Kashmir professor Sheikh Showkat Hussain. The charges include making assertions prejudicial to national integration and causing public mischief. Two others named in the complaint, a professor, and a hardline Kashmiri separatist leader, have since passed away.
Freedom of Speech in India
The reasons for the approval of prosecution by Saxena after 13 years remain unclear, and there has been no response from his office regarding the matter.
Arundhati Roy, aged 61, is not only a celebrated novelist but also an outspoken political and human rights activist. Despite the recent developments, she has not issued any statements in response to the situation.
The decision to prosecute Roy has raised concerns about freedom of speech under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, drawing criticism from opposition leaders and writers. P. Chidambaram, a senior leader of the main opposition Congress party and India’s former home (interior) minister in 2010, expressed his disapproval, stating that the move reflects a lack of tolerance and forbearance within the government.
The case highlights the ongoing debates surrounding freedom of expression and dissent in India, particularly concerning political issues such as Kashmir.
