Orthodoxy
The writer is a lawyer, formerly practising and teaching law in Lahore, and currently based in Singapore. He holds an LLM from New York University where he was a Hauser Global Scholar. He tweets @HNiaziii
In the land of the pure, unorthodox thought is a crime.
Some nations pride themselves on having a culture of free speech. While the United States may have many flaws, its respect for the power of ideas is not one of them. Pakistan does not have a culture of free speech — it has a culture of silencing the voice of those who dare question the status quo.
The inability of our state to let its people express themselves holds this country back. Its muzzle over its own people prevents them from realising their incredible potential. Without working proactively towards developing a culture of free speech, we not only miss an essential ingredient for the functioning of democracy, but an essential element for human progress.
Let’s consider the link between democracy and freedom of speech first. In Athens, about 2,500 years ago, every citizen who so desired would congregate at a designated area in the city. Here, any free man could state what he believed was the best policy for the city-state. The idea was that the best decisions and policies could only be realised by debating many different points of view. The best idea would then be put to vote.
Today, any state that wishes to call itself a democracy, in its true liberal sense, adheres to the fundamental right of freedom of expression — a human right protected by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which Pakistan has also committed to in the form of Article 19 of its Constitution.
All the constitutional promises in the world don’t mean much unless there is a culture built around valuing them. The state is not interested in developing a culture of democracy. It wants unquestioning obedience to its preferred narratives. In this way it resembles the outlook of the colonial government that we were supposed to have left behind over 70 years ago.
The coloniser criminalised most forms of dissent through offences such as sedition: a law that came into being in 1870 with the sole purpose of curbing the speech of people resisting colonial rule. Today, the same law is used in post-colonial states like India and Pakistan to silence dissent. History has a crude sense of humour.
Laws like sedition make it impossible to create a culture of free speech because all critical speech is seen as treacherous. Recently, more than 40 members of the opposition found themselves the subject of an FIR accusing them of sedition because of Nawaz Sharif’s speech last month which criticised both the PTI and the military.
While the charges against most of the members of the opposition have been dropped, it is still unclear what exactly was seditious about the speech. Criticising the military is not by itself sedition, but the way such criticism is construed by law enforcement is clear from the kitchen sink of anti-state offences that were mentioned in the FIR — from Section 121A (conspiring to wage war against Pakistan) to Section 123A (condemning the creation of Pakistan).
To be sure, many people — like the Prime Minister — believe that Pakistan has too much free speech. After all, politicians are criticised all the time. But this misses the point that free speech does not mean the freedom to criticise only one segment of power. It means the freedom to criticise all forms of power.
Of course, a culture of free speech isn’t just important because of its political connotations. Our ability to express ourselves is inextricably linked with our identity. Human beings are distinguishable from other species by their ability to communicate through their mastery over language. Free speech is a celebration of our evolutionary progress. By expressing ourselves we tell the world who we are. Sadly, we are losing this value as well.
Orthodoxy starts early in Pakistan. Our schools suppress critical thought; children are taught to memorise a biased view of history as opposed to reflecting on it. A more severe orthodoxy is required when it comes to religion. Straying from the one true narrative can cost a person their life.
The internet challenged the state’s control over this dominant ideology. The ban on TikTok is a reflection of this fear. Not only does it rob people of an avenue for expressing their identity, but it disproportionately effects the freedom of expression of those who have been historically voiceless in Pakistan: the poor and the labour class. These men and women found themselves in the spotlight of public discourse. They could no longer be ignored.
This was too much for the state. The emancipation of the common man from its dominant ideology through technology was enough to ban the entire platform on some vague excuse of ‘indecency’.
In fact, some vague conception of threats to our morality and values is dragged out every time there is an expression that challenges the status quo: whether in biscuit ads in which women dance; or the web series, Churails.
As we tighten the noose around every avenue of free expression in this country, the state communicates to its population that unorthodox thought is a crime. Dissent is criminal.
But in this, the state could not be more wrong. Dissent is patriotic.
Without a culture of free speech, the people of Pakistan cannot compete with the world in terms of creativity. Our vibrant music industry is already a victim of this environment. No innovation can occur in a country where everything is an attack on its culture and values.
The Prime Minister is wrong when he said that he is democracy. Democracy does not fear speech.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 13th, 2020.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.