Shahid Majeed Mir
The society where such rights are recognised and protected is a society worth to social justice
Human beings possess some distinguished attributes. They are inborn and exclusive associates of them. To being rational and thinking is a specific note of mention. This inherited thinking power invariantly remains associated with human beings throughout their life span. It’s its unique distinctions, that human beings are master of all creatures on earth.
They have at times modified the way of living to overpower the ancient dictators. Herein lies the space for thinking and subsequent expression ability. It leads man to societal well being and harmonic balance. Such ideological evolution went through active and passive phases till emergence of Democratic way of life. Democracy as per Jhon Dewey is a way of life which places central value to human beings as an individual.
The rights and liberties of an individual are primary concern. It’s held on the belief of “In the good of individual lies the good of society“. Indian Constitution contains the same notion of society. It includes a whole section in chapter 3rd on Fundamental rights of citizens.
Most noteworthy provision is article 19 which upholds some basic provisions essential for completion of individual’s goals. Among the provisions “Freedom of speech and expression” stands on sentinel. It accords recognition to individual of their intellect.
It envisions that “Citizen has right to express his opinion, belief, views, and convictions freely by word of mouth, writing, printing, picturing or in any other form.
Although the expressional ability of man is inherited part of being. But the Constitutional recognition provided to this freedom ensures its sustenance in our society. It is guided by the norm of rule by the people where everyone has right to express one’s opinion according to one’s intellect. Barring the basis of recognition of individual’s caste, status etc. Being member of society or citizen of India is to have right to express.
The most noteworthy feature of expressing oneself is by writing. The Media and books play a prominent role in insemination of ideas. They cover a wide array of readers thereby influencing their way of thinking.
Therefore the use of writing is a simple way of expressing one’s belief on topic within precincts of law. Article 19 itself contains the conditional Clause of restrictions on this right. That’s to say “Everyone barring societal status can express through writing within bounds set by the Constitution“.
Whether newspaper or magazines a lot of citizens are participating in national makeup. The newspapers seems filled with opinions regarding issues of society. They shape the mentality of those in power. In this way the realignment takes the track of common societal feeling.
This way writing becomes a medium between government and society and in turn between society and individual. It reshapes the contributors way of thinking and impacts his style of living after response.
Human beings possess a distinguished quality of thinking. If physical makeup of even two individuals differ the Mental makeup shall never be believed to be coincidental. It varies from individual to individual in a society. Therefore expression of opinions in writing are bound for difference.
Hence to grant the citizens “right to write” is to accept the variable mature of thinking. As Mill asserts in essay on liberty “if one individual differs in opinion from whole society the society had no right to obstruct the individual from expression”. He further defends his claim that “we don’t know where from relevant idea may emerge. The lone individual may be right; if not so the individual will rectify the way of thinking”. Hence right to write is the inherited nature of man to express his opinion.
Until and unless they are given the right to write society may perish on its own weight. There’s a notion of critical analysis regarding writing style of individuals. Is the mere expression of one’s opinion about government unethical? Is the anti government narrative an anti state narrative? Whenever “right to write” shares the discussion travel the critics dub it as tool of some ideological orientation. However such a notion can’t be rejected altogether but to proclaim one as ideological perverted man requires a serious rethinking.
The synthesis of ever growing ideology accords significant place to writing form of expression. In India this write was reiterated by Supreme Court case after case barring some exceptions as mentioned in Constitution. By far this right augurs well for Democratic heavyweight who espouses social justice and individuality.
There’s a long list of newspapers containing daily news stories covering length and breadth of country. But the critical analysis of whole news story comes from different beliefs and opinions. They critically analyse the pros and cons of issue at hand. Thenceforth it’s blended with an acceptable conclusion.
Of course Right to Write is undisputable but Write is Right may not be always in consonance with common aspirations. Therefore on one hand Writing way of expression is right but the exclusive claim of the writing being always right is a slap on intellectual growth. This right nourishes the mental ability of society.
It brings to fore the prior assessment of evolving issues. It counters the established notion at times and discards the irrational norm. The societal foundation is certainly held by pillars of Democratic ideals of which Right to Write is suitable candidate. It opens the eyes of society and helps in intellectual growth of citizens. It also sets a norm for generations to come.
The society where such rights are recognized and protected is a society worth to social justice. It enthrals stability to society as contradictions are resolved prior to disaster. Let’s hope this Right doesn’t come under strain in years to come.
Writer Shahid Majeed Mir hails from Misribehak Machil Kupwara and can be reached at email@example.com*