The freedom of speech and expression is also embedded in the notion of secularism. Even as a conceptual idea that may not resonate entirely with the Indian experience, secularism is opposed to the idea of a theocratic state which by itself makes freedom of expression an essential ingredient for its successful practice. The Indian variant of secularism which calls for equal treatment of all religions makes it even more imperative that the freedom of speech and expression be upheld. The Indian Constitution provides for the Right to Freedom of Religion under Articles 25-28 which guarantees all citizens the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion, freedom to manage religious affairs, freedom from paying taxes for promotion of any religion and the freedom to attend a religious instruction or religious worship in certain education institutions. Enjoyment of these rights thus entails the provision of free speech and expression.
How does one practice and propagate one’s faith without the freedom of expression? Or, how would minority religious groups exercise dissent to any efforts by majoritarian groups at encroaching upon their cultural rights? Or, how would members of any religious Religion resist forced conversions?
We tap into freedom of expression embedded in the idea of secularism using two questions: (a) people should be allowed to express their opinion freely even if they make fun of religious communities other than their own, and (b) people should be allowed to express their opinion freely even if they are promoting violence against other communities. Both questions speak to what constitutes freedom of expression in ethnically heterogeneous societies where equal rights for all religions lies at the of heart nation-building.
While freedom of expression is fundamental to secular practice, the relationship between the two is not an easy one. However, the Indian Constitution does not guarantee an unconditional enjoyment of the freedom to express oneself freely. The first Amendment to the Constitution imposes a set of “reasonable restrictions” on the freedom of
expression, curtailing public speech against the “interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence”. This position is in contrast to Western views (notably the US) on freedom of expression. Does freedom of expression include freely ridiculing persons from other religious communities and their practices, and promoting violence against other communities? More broadly, are these notions of freedom of expression consistent with the practice of secularism in India? While we do not adopt a position on this debate, we examine the factors that appear to drive differences in public opinion on freedom of expression and how it relates to an underlying idea of secularism.
Figure 3A.11: Ridiculing Other Religious Communities (by State)
When it comes to allowing people to freely make fun of religious communities other than one’s own, we find that almost three quarters of respondents in Kerala either fully or somewhat agree (Figure 3A.11). followed by Tamil Nadu where about 47 percent fully or somewhat agree. About 30 and 25 percent of respondents in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand respectively also hold this view. We find that in most other States, the proportion of respondents who either fully or somewhat support this view ranges from about 17 to 21 percent. However, this number falls dramatically in Jammu and Kashmir (10 percent), West Bengal (7 percent) and Delhi (13 percent). We also find that Assam, Tripura, and West Bengal have larger proportions of respondents with no opinion ranging between 23 and 37 percent.
Here again we find that support for allowing people to make fun of other communities draws most support from Hindu and Christian communities while fewer proportions of Muslims and Sikhs support this position (Figure 3A.12). Approximately 27 percent Hindus and 26 percent Christians either fully or somewhat agree that people should be allowed to freely express an opinion that makes fun of other communities. The proportion of Muslim and Sikh respondents who either fully or somewhat agree is about 18 and 19 percent respectively.
Figure 3A.13: Ridiculing other Religious Communities (by Caste)
We do not find differences across upper caste, Dalit and Adivasis supporting this view - approximately 21 percent, but a larger proportion of OBC groups tend to support this position - about 34 percent (Figure 3A.13). This is a relatively large difference and is worth exploring.
Figure 3A.15: Ridiculing Religious Communities (by Rural-Urban)
A larger proportion of rural respondents tend to agree that people should be allowed to express an opinion that makes fun of other communities relative to urban respondents, and the difference is about 5 percentage points (Figure 3A.15).
Figure 3A.16: Promoting Violence against other Communities (by State)
We find that for most States, the proportion of respondents who either fully or somewhat agree that people should be allowed to freely express an opinion that promotes violence against other communities is relatively low (Figure 3A.16). For instance, about 10 percent of respondents in Jammu and Kashmir hold this view. Similarly, in West Bengal and Delhi the proportions are about 14 and 16 percent respectively. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Uttar Pradesh are States where this proportion increases to 53, 39, and 33 percent respectively. For the remaining States, the proportion of respondents varies between 20 (Tripura) and 26 percent (Uttarakhand). Respondents with no opinions are mostly in Assam and West
Figure 3A.17: Promoting Violence against other communities (by Religion)
In this section, we observe significant differences across religious identities (Figure 3A.16). Muslims are much less likely to support the view that an individual promoting violence against other communities should be allowed to express that opinion freely. Only about 18 percent of Muslims either fully or somewhat agree. Hindus, Christians, and Sikhs are more likely to agree with this position. Approximately 28 percent of Hindus support this position followed by about 26 percent of Sikh respondents. We find that about 23 percent of Christians support this position.
Figure 3A.18: Promoting Violence against other Communities (by Caste)
Among the different caste groups we find that Dalits and OBCs are more likely to either fully or somewhat agree that people should be allowed to express their opinion
Figure 3A.19: Promoting Violence against other Communities (by Education Level)
We find a difference, about 5 percentage points, across respondents based on levels of education and the expression of ideas that promote violence against other communities (Figure 3A.19). Respondents who identify as non-literate are less likely to either fully or somewhat agree with the position that persons promoting violence against other communities should be allowed to express this view freely, compared to respondents with a college level of education. For instance, while approximately 23 percent of non-literates agree with this view, the proportion increases to about 28 percent among respondents with a college level of education.
Figure 3A.20: Promoting Violence against other Communities (by Rural-Urban)
We also find that rural respondents are more likely to either fully or somewhat agree with the view that persons promoting violence against other communities should be allowed to express this view freely (Figure 3A.20). There is approximately a 4 percentage point