Censorship and Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression
Censorship and Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression
ABSTRACT
In India, censorship functions as a multifaceted system that has both repressive and protective aspects, significantly influencing both individual rights and public discourse. On the one hand, censorship is defended as an essential instrument for preserving social harmony, national security, and public order particularly in a multicultural society characterized by political, religious, and ethnic sensitivities. Censorship occurs when individuals or groups of individuals do publish or speak something which is harmful, immoral, against morality, contrary to the public order or which hampers the peace and safety of the nation, offensive or creates violence. Because of which the government agencies, officials and organisations remove those harmful items from the social media platform imposing censorship and they also make laws and regulations.
Censorship basically violates the right to freedom of speech and expression, which is fundamental to democracies, even though it may be used to prevent harm or maintain peace. By limiting the free flow of ideas and opinions, censorship stifles dissenting voices, restricts artistic and creative freedom, and makes it more difficult for people to challenge authority or engage in public discourse. The effects of censorship are particularly evident in the digital age, where it can chill people and make them self-censor out of fear of reprisals. In addition to distorting the marketplace of ideas, this also makes it hard to find important information, which hinders people from making informed decisions and from building a diverse and inclusive society. Even though censorship is sometimes practiced with the intention of protecting others, it ultimately poses significant risks to intellectual freedom and democratic values that rely on free and vigorous expression.
Censorship and Freedom of Speech and
Expression in India
India's history of censorship begins during the British colonial era, when laws were made to maintain colonial authority and suppress political dissent. Following India's independence in 1947, the government maintained and extended many of these laws. Censorship's main goals of regulating the flow of information and protecting the government's interests have not altered, despite the fact that it has grown over time to encompass new media, such as films and digital platforms. The Indian government has enacted several other censorship-related laws and regulations over the years, including the Indian Telegraph Act (1885), the Official Secrets Act (1923), and the Information Technology Act (2000), in an attempt to regulate the content of communication, information, and entertainment.
Censorship in India is complex. We can also say that it often becomes a controversial issue which has been the subject of debate and discussion not only in the past history of India but also to the present era. The term “Censorship” refers to the restriction of speech suppression of the free voice an opinion of the citizens of the country or it can be the other forms of expression that are deemed to be harmful, immoral, against the morality, contrary to the public order or which hampers the peace and safety of the nation, offensive or creates violence.
India has a rich cultural heritage with a diverse population who are living together and forming a country with different beliefs, cultures, religions, languages, orientations etc, and when so many different peoples with different faith together there the government and the peoples face challenges in maintaining the laws, rules and regulations as people often scrutinize or hampers the social harmony and indulge in spreading propagandas and hate speeches or gets indulged in other forms of violent acts.
To prevent people from getting indulged in violent acts, spreading hate speeches, propagandas, or any act which hampers the social harmony, peace and tranquility of the nation most of the times the government takes help of the censorship and imposes restrictions on the freedom of speech of its citizens which have been guaranteed under The Indian law, under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, but Article 19(2) allows for "reasonable restrictions" on grounds such as national security, public order, morality, and defamation. Freedom of Speech is all about being able to speak freely without censorship or fear of punishment.
Legal Framework Governing Censorship
In India, censorship is implemented by a number of laws and regulatory agencies,
The Cinematograph Act, 1952 (notably empowering the Central Board of Film Certification to censor films)
Enforcing these laws is a major responsibility of organizations like the Press Council of India and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Constitutional Provisions: Freedom of Speech and Expression
The Indian Constitution's Article 19(1)(a) ensures that every citizen has the freedom to express themselves. This includes artistic, commercial, and symbolic forms of expression in addition to spoken and written words. Press freedom, information access, and even the right to silence is all included in the right. This freedom is not unrestricted, though. The state may impose "reasonable restrictions" under Article 19(2) for a number of reasons, such as:
Sovereignty and integrity of India
Security of the state
Friendly relations with foreign states
Public order
Decency or morality
Contempt of court
Defamation
Incitement to an offense
Current State of Censorship
Censorship in India has increased recently, especially in the arts and digital media. When online content is judged offensive or a threat to national security, the government has used its power to block or remove it. Social media companies frequently abide by requests from the government to remove content or suspend accounts. The CBFC regularly orders cuts or outright bans on films deemed politically or socially sensitive, demonstrating the persistence of film censorship.
For instance, foreign documentaries that criticize government figures and movies like "Padmavat" have been restricted or banned. Independent media and the press have also been under pressure. Most of the attacks on journalists, arrests, and economic sanctions, such as the stripping of non-profit status from independent news websites, were carried out in 2025 alone. New legislation, such as the Maharashtra Public Security Bill, looms to further curtail media freedom, and YouTube and other online news websites have been blocked.
Judicial Safeguards and Challenges
The Supreme Court of India has played a crucial role in interpreting and safeguarding freedom of speech. Landmark cases, such as:
Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras (1950): This case has set important precedents limiting arbitrary state censorship and reinforcing the fundamental nature of free speech under Article 19(1)(a). This case involved a journalist whose magazine, Crossroads, was banned by the Madras (now Tamil Nadu) government for allegedly containing inflammatory content that could cause public disorder. Thapar objected to this prohibition, claiming it infringed his inherent right of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor, stating that criticism and dissent are covered under free speech, and the government can't prohibit publications just because they are critical or unpopular unless they are likely to cause violence or disorder. The judgment struck down the ban, emphasizing that the government’s action was unjustified. This landmark decision has been crucial in protecting free speech in India, setting a precedent for media regulation and upholding citizens’ rights to express their views without fear of censorship. However, the judiciary also upholds the constitutionality of reasonable restrictions, often deferring to the state on matters of security, public order, and morality.
Ajay Goswami Vs. Union of India: The case revolved around the provision of the Cable Television Network (Regulations) Act, 1995. Which sought to regulate the contents of the television programs broadcast on the cable network. In this case Ajay Goswami was the petitioner and he argued that certain provisions of the Act violate the Right to Freedom of Speech and expression guaranteed under the Articles 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. And the Supreme Court of India Upheld that the Act did not violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The court also stated that the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression are not absolute rights, and because of which they are subjected to certain reasonable restrictions in the interest of and to protect the morality, public order and decency amongst the general public at large. The court also clarified that the Act was implemented to keep a check and control on the contents which are being broadcasted and shown on the television. And also, to see that those contents are not hampering public morality and decency.
Causes of Censorship in India
Censorship in India is shaped by a complex interplay of historical, legal, political, and social factors. The primary causes can be summarized as follows:
Political Control: Governments may censor to suppress criticism, control public opinion, or silence opposition, thereby maintaining power.
National Security Concerns: Authorities restrict speech to prevent the disclosure of sensitive information that could compromise security.
Moral or Religious Values: Content deemed offensive to religious beliefs or societal morals is often censored to protect public sensibilities.
Protection from Harm: Speech that incites violence, promotes hate, or spreads false information may be restricted to prevent harm to individuals or groups.
Social Stability: Censorship is sometimes justified to avoid social unrest, conflict, or division among communities.
Protection of Vulnerable Groups: Certain speech, such as child pornography or defamation, is restricted to protect vulnerable populations.
Economic Interests: Corporations or governments may censor to protect business interests, trade secrets, or proprietary information.
Technological and Digital Control: Online platforms and governments use censorship to moderate content, enforce terms of service, or block undesirable material.
These causes demonstrate that censorship is often justified with protective or controlling motives but can significantly limit the right to free expression.
Effects of Censorship in India
Censorship in India, whether in traditional media, digital platforms, or through internet shutdowns, has far-reaching consequences for society, democracy, the economy, and culture. The main effects are outlined below:
Stifles Dissent: Censorship suppresses critical voices and political opposition, limiting public debate and accountability.
Chilling Effect: People may self-censor out of fear of punishment, leading to a climate of silence and reduced expression.
Restricts Information Access: Limits access to diverse viewpoints and important information, hindering informed decision-making.
Undermines Democracy: Inhibits the free exchange of ideas essential for a functioning democracy.
Silences Marginalized Groups: Often targets minority or dissenting voices, increasing marginalization and inequality.
Creates Mistrust: Leads to public skepticism and mistrust of authorities and media.
Impacts Creativity: Restricts artistic, literary, and academic freedom, stifling innovation and cultural development
Suppression of Free Speech and Expression: Censorship limits free expression, reduces media diversity, and discourages dissent by fostering a climate of fear and self-censorship.
Critical Analysis
India’s censorship regime is frequently criticized for granting excessive discretion to authorities, leading to politically motivated censorship and violations of international human rights standards. The lack of clear, consistent guidelines further exacerbates uncertainty and restricts open debate. Calls for reform emphasize the need to align Indian laws with global norms and to protect the fundamental right to free expression. Recent examples, such as the banning of the BBC documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the censorship of films like "Padmavat" and books such as "The Satanic Verses," highlight how censorship can be used to suppress narratives that challenge official positions or dominant ideologies. Such actions not only restrict access to information but also reinforce existing power structures and marginalize alternative perspectives, ultimately eroding the foundational right to freedom of speech and expression in India.
While censorship can serve beneficial purposes by protecting public order and national security, its overreach and arbitrary application pose significant risks to democratic freedoms. The resulting climate of self-censorship and fear hampers the open exchange of ideas, limits informed public participation and undermines the robust civic engagement essential for a functioning democracy. Addressing these challenges requires clearer legal standards, greater transparency, and a stronger commitment to protecting the right to dissent and criticize without fear of reprisal.
CONCLUSION
Censorship in India presents a complex duality, while it can serve to protect citizens by curbing illegal activities, hate speech, and content that threatens public order or national security, it also poses significant risks to fundamental rights and democratic values. On the one hand, censorship ensures social stability, stemming the tide of disinformation, and upholds public morals, particularly in a communal society open to communal tensions. Though, in practice, its application is not transparent and well defined and thus is subjected to arbitrary application and stifling of genuine dissent. Such an overextension handicaps the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution by inducing a chilling effect wherein citizens and media self-edit so as not to incur legal or social sanctions. The consequence is a stunted public debate, restricted exposure to varied information, and an entrenchment of the current power arrangements, which in the long term erodes the values of an open and knowledgeable democracy.
Closing Credits
Author - SASWATI BARAI
Affiliation - AMITY UNIVERSITY KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL
Comments
Post a Comment