T

The connection between the public sale and display of books, and the committing of acts of violence threatening the sovereignty of India, or at striking terror in people (the general definition of “terrorist acts” under UAPA) is far-fetched and absurd. By this logic not just publishers and booksellers, but also journalists, teachers, researchers, activists, lawyers, students, librarians, or simply readers and buyers of such literature can be charged and imprisoned. The absurdity of the charge in fact indicates the absolute impunity with which the police can act, and harass people. The case is a direct attack on the constitutional right of freedom of expression and indicates a shrinkage of the public sphere under an increasingly authoritarian regime. The ire of the police being directed at books dealing with political ideas inimical to the present regime, indicates a curtailment of the political freedom of dissemination of information, and free exchange of ideas and beliefs so integral to a democracy.

The scope of punishment under Section 18 (punishment for conspiracy, etc) of Ch IV of the UAPA under which Sunita is charged, extends to the commission of “any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act”. This vagueness of definition is extremely dangerous as it gives the state complete authority to criminalise any activity it wishes to proscribe, and punish any person it finds inconvenient. The intent behind a law like the UAPA, to suppress political opposition and curtailing democratic freedoms, is slowly but surely revealing itself. It needs to be strongly opposed by all sections of people in the interest of protecting our democratic freedom. In keeping with this, PUDR strongly condemns the action of the Maharashtra police and demands that all charges against Sunita be dropped, and the policemen guilty of harassing her be held accountable.

Secretaries, People’s Union for Democratic Rights Delhi

Media Covering Parliament

S

One issue not touched upon by Banerjee is the role of the media covering Parliament. Since he himself has been a long-time reporter of parliamentary proceedings, this omission is quite surprising. The media invariably focuses on scenes of parliamentary disruption (of which, unfortunately, there are quite a few on a daily process) and ignores the excellent speeches delivered on occasions like the union budget, the railway budget, the office of profit bill, the national rural employment guarantee bill, the Indo-US nuclear deal, the Netaji Subash Bose Commission of Inquiry, the internal security situation and so many other issues. Serious debates are not regarded as worth detailed coverage by the media (except by AIR and Doordarshan in their ‘Today in Parliament’ coverage) even as pandemonium is extensively covered.

While more extensive media coverage of Parliament is not a sufficient condition for arresting its decline, it certainly is a necessary condition.

Notes for Contributors

Here are some guidelines fortake up to six to eight months from the address, day-time phone numbers andauthors who wish to make date of acceptance to appear in the email address. submissions to the journal. EPW. Every effort will, however, be made (The email address of writers in the Special

to ensure early publication. Papers with Article, Commentary and Discussion