Safeguarding Free Expression

The article critiques increasing institutional and regulatory control over freedom of expression, particularly within Indian universities, amidst ongoing court cases addressing restrictions on speech. It argues for a reaffirmation of constitutional values in light of India’s declining press freedom and rising censorship trends in academia.

Reasserting Constitutional Morality in an Era of Institutional Overreach

Historical and Constitutional Underpinnings of Free Speech

• Areopagitica and Opposition to Licensing: John Milton’s Areopagitica (1644) opposed the licensing system (imprimatur), which required prior government approval for publications in England—analogous to current debates over institutional restrictions in India.
• Freedom of Press as a Democratic Imperative: The U.S. First Amendment (1791) explicitly protects freedom of speech and the press, recognizing it as vital for informed public choice and democratic governance.
• India’s Constitutional Position: Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, while Article 19(2) permits only reasonable restrictions based on sovereignty, public order, morality, etc., codified by the 1951 and 1963 constitutional amendments.

Institutional Controls and Judicial Safeguards

• Judicial Doctrine of Proportionality: In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court mandated that any restriction on free speech must be legitimate, necessary, and least intrusive, with the burden of proof on the State.
• Private Institutions as 'State' Under Constitution: The judgment in Janet Jeyapaul v. SRM University (2015) ruled that private universities performing public functions fall within the ambit of ‘State’ under Article 12, hence subject to Article 14 (Right to Equality).
• Limitations on Executive Restrictions: No government authority can impose speech restrictions via executive orders alone—legislative backing is necessary. Internal university codes or regulatory controls are not grounds for curbing constitutionally protected expression.

Ethical, Academic, and Policy Implications

• Suppression Undermines Academic Excellence: Overregulation leads to intellectual suffocation, reducing the capacity for path-breaking research. Free intellectual environments, as in ancient Indian gurukuls, historically fostered thinkers like Aryabhata and Charaka.
• Expression as a Path to Truth and Social Good: Citing Milton and Holmes Jr., the article underscores that open expression enables public discernment of truth—critical in the age of disinformation and fake news.
• India’s Vishwaguru Aspiration vs. Global Rankings: India’s rank of 151 out of 180 on the World Press Freedom Index undermines its ethical claim to global leadership; robust academic freedom is essential for sustaining democratic credibility.

Practice Question

Q. "In a constitutional democracy, the right to freedom of speech is not just a legal entitlement but a foundational pillar of human dignity and public accountability." Critically examine the statement in the context of increasing institutional restrictions on academic expression in India.