Freedom of expression is inviolable and sacrosanct. But it is the central issue if and only if Rashmi meant to express those things. For instance, she meant to criticize IIPM and expose the truth behind their tall claims. And she stood by it. this case is, however, different. It seems, from the apology on JAM’s site, that the magazine did not intend to cause offence to any religion or community. Rashmi regrets that the illustrations inadvertantly offended people. Thus it is not a question of free speech. It has more to do with overzealous and faulty use of the law by the Police.
Gaurav Sabnis makes an important point while condemning the Mumbai police action against Rashmi Bansal.
Comments
1 comment. Leave your comment »
Anirudh
Dec 12th, 2006 at 5:08 am | #
Why not make this a sticky post? Make the mainstream media write about it.