The sound and fury triggered by the arrest of the Republic TV anchor Arnab Goswami has brought under spotlight the unjust and dishonest interpretations given by the right-winger mandarins of the ruling NDA at the centre to the phrase of freedom of speech.
The Mumbai police arrested Arnab for the reasons absolutely not relatable to the so-called freedom of speech. The right to freedom in the Article 19 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to every citizen. It is obviously not an exclusive privilege provided to individuals owning media houses and editors/ anchors of publications/TV channels. And, Arnab is in no way exceptional just because he has the privilege to be a mouth-piece for the majoritarian agenda of the right wingers in power.
Arnab and his supporters, who include Union Home Minister Amit Shah and another firebrand minister Smriti Irani, are unabashedly at their best putting the right of freedom of expression over the right to life involving a 53-year old interior designer Anvay Naik. Arnab has been accused of abetting Nayak’s death by defaulting on payments which he was due to the victim.
Is it gagging media?
Does the anchor’s default come under the purview of the right to freedom of speech and free press which Arnab and his political godfathers arrogated to themselves or his arrest for his cognizable offence remind them of the Emergency days of Indira’s regime?
Arnab’s argument that the Mumbai police at the behest of the ruling Congress-Shiv Sena government reopened the Nayak’s suicide case to attack the independent journalism which he fearlessly pursued lacks substance. Why was the case closed in 2018? The reason is obvious–Maharashtra was under the coalition rule of BJP-Shiv Sena then and Arnab by virtue of his proximity with the power centres in the state had gained enough leverage to hush up the case by influencing the investigation agencies. Akshata Naik, the widow of Anvay Naik, told the media that she desperately knocked at the doors of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and several state and central probe agencies for justice soon after her husband’s death. There was no response and the reasons are obvious.
Media trial
Arnab is known for playing jury and executioner as well during his media trials without having tolerance to hear others with his pre-conceived and motivated agenda subservient to his backroom political masters. A couple of cases—the death of Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput and rape and death of a Dalit girl at Uttar Pradesh’ Hathras reported in the recent past– comes as a live example to suggest how biased Arnab is in pursuit of his job to suit his hidden political agenda. Rajput did not leave behind any suicide note as in the case of Nayak. Yet, the anchor of the reputed TV channel ran 24X7 crackling debates on his channel targeting the actor’s friend Rhae Chakraborty for his alleged role in the death without any substantial evidences. In the process, he squarely blamed the Mumbai police for “failing” to make headway in the actor’s case. Thus, Arnab tried his best to help the BJP stoke the sentiment of sub-regionalism surrounding the death of Rajput in the poll-bound Bihar (Bihar is actor’s home state). But, in contrast, his usual sound and fury conspicuously went missing in the gruesome Hathras case even when UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath of Thakur community to which the accused in the rape and murder case also belong showed reluctance even to pay a courtesy visit to the victim’s family. The Union Home Minister and his fellow cabinet ministers were so prompt instantly condemning the Arnab’s arrest. But why were the BJP government’s top brass not silent during the anti CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) protests which left hundreds of protesters killed and wounded in police action nation-wide? So, it is clear that you adopt different yardsticks to deal with your friends and those on the other side of the fence.