Dinanath Batra, Indian media and freedom of expression

9 June 2014

The self claimed sentinels of the republic were very unhappy these days. They were not getting any issue to forget their deep pain of having to see the BJP and Modi come to power in spite of their opposition. Even after two weeks of new Government, they were not getting any issue. So they invented one. The issue of so called ‘ban on the books’ by Dinanath Batra, the convener of Shiksha Bachao Andolan. “Who is Dinanath Batra?” “who is RSS?” yelled one ‘nation wants to know’ anchor. It is a ‘silencing of liberal india’, declared another intellectual in print media. There were copycat programs elsewhere, with different people invited on different channels. All channels took one care; they did not invite either Dinanath Batra or the publishing houses involved, because that would have exposed the shallowness of their allegations.

Yet the arguments were farfetched. For example, the publisher Orient Blackswan claimed to put the ‘Communalism and Sexual Violence: Ahmedabad Since 1969’ under ‘review’ because of perceived threats, legal and otherwise, to the publication and its staff, because Dinanath Batra sent a notice to them about another book, Sekhar Bandyopadhyay's "From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India". Taking this claim of ‘perceived threat’ as Gospel truth, the media channels started the war cry of ‘freedom of expression in danger’. They claimed that although Dinanath Batra may be in his legal rights, still what he is doing is harmful to freedom of expression, that people like him should put their argument separately than objecting legally to the books, that Indian laws are outdated and harmful to freedom of expression and particularly section 295A prohibits freedom of expression of international standard as claimed by Penguin publishers.

Newsbharati believes that in this age of internet freedom, the readers are quite able to form their own opinion about any issue, provided they are aware of the facts. Newsbharati presents the fact sheet on the issues, persons and institutions involved and some pertinent questions. Since the fight of Dinanath Batra with Orient Blackswan is in early stage, we use the previous case of Dinanath Batra versus Penguin publishers and ‘The Hindus an alternative history’ of Wendy Doniger for analysis.

Dinanath Batra

Many people who meet Dinanath Batra have been impressed by his energy, dedication to his cause and more important, his open mindedness for debates and discussions. Advaita Kala, the author of the script of the famous film ‘Kahani’, writes in Dailymail of UK,

At 84, Dinanath Batra is sprightly; he sits erect and exudes an energy that belies his advanced years. A former headmaster, the educationist retired as principal some 30 odd years ago and has since dedicated himself to education.

………..But this begs the question further, is this then a case for a ban or for debate? I tell Batra that whilst he has emerged victorious in his legal fight, he is increasingly being seen as "the villain of Freedom of Expression".

I am pushing my luck, but he is not offended. It's your freedom of expression, he repeats, tongue in cheek.

……….Somewhere along the way we have started conversing openly, pushing the boundaries of political correctness. He is an avid debater and enjoys being challenged. I steer the conversation back to his personal definition of freedom of expression.

He extrapolates on three words - svayatta (autonomy), svatantrata (independence), svacchandata (independent action/uncontrolled behaviour. It is svatantrata that he believes in, the right to express but not to cause offence, and if offence it caused the law provides for it to be challenged.

Look at America, why do they have nudist colonies, he asks me. Nothing wrong with nudists, I contest; they believe it's a way of being closer to nature. Nothing wrong, he agrees, but even in "free" America there are laws for public obscenity and they are not permitted to roam naked in society.

Our discussion comes to an end and Batra escorts me to the door. You can take the elevator but if you have a tendency to diabetes, take the stairs, he teases. I take the stairs.

Batra is someone I suspect I will disagree with more than agree with, but I come away with a grudging admiration for his tenacity and his ability to fight a good fight.

In this battle for freedom of expression, the opponent is a worthy one, who I dare say takes the fight more seriously than those of us who stop at writing columns, signature campaigns, outrage on social media.

The economic times Journalist TK Arun writes

‘For India’s liberals,Dinanath Batra is anathema. He should be a role model. Batra is a relentless campaigner for his cause of excising books, particularly school and college textbooks, of what he considers to be distortions of Indian history and culture.’

Shougar Dasgupta reporting for livemint says

‘Batra, a mild, affable man, tall and still upright, maintaining the posture of the school headmaster he once was, does not seem unhinged by rage now. He is an award-winning teacher and not someone who comes across as a crank in conversation.’

The point to note is that Dinanath Batra is primarily campaigning against the school and college textbooks. One very gratifying instance, he says, was removing the reference to Bhagat Singh as a terrorist in a textbook; the opposing counsel for NCERT was the lawyer Prashant Bhushan, a worthy opponent.

To him, Wendy Donigers book in itself is not important. But when a person who writes with bias against Hindus is acclaimed as an authority on Hinduism it is certainly a matter of concern. As quoted in Wikipedia  [No reliable source has been given for this quote]

Assessing Doniger's body of work, K. M. Shrimali, Professor of Ancient Indian History at theUniversity of Delhi, writes:

... it (1973) also happened to be the year when her first major work in early India's religious history, viz.,Siva, the Erotic Ascetic was published and had instantly become a talking point for being a path-breaking work. I still prescribe it as the most essential reading to my postgraduate students at the University of Delhi, where I have been teaching a compulsory course on 'Evolution of Indian Religions' for the last nearly four decades. It was the beginning of series of extremely fruitful and provocative encounters with the formidable scholarship of Wendy Doniger.

It is this impact which she creates in the so called academic circles that Dinanath Batra is challenging.

Wendy Doniger and school of divinity

Wendy Doniger is frequently certified as an ‘authority’ on Hinduism by the self declared sentinels and intellectuals of India. She is, to quote from the official website, “Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions; also in the Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations, the Committee on Social Thought, and the College” in the University of Chicago divinity school.

Now what is divinity school? It is difficult to understand in India, where even lighting a lamp on the occasion of some inauguration may harm the ‘secular fabric’ according to our so called intellectuals. Some universities state it openly, some not so openly. For example, the Vanderbilt university website states plainly

‘The Divinity School seeks to fulfill the following objectives: to engage individuals in a theological understanding of religious traditions; to help persons, both lay and ordained, re-envision and prepare for the practice of Christian ministry in our time.....’

The Chicago school of divinity does not state it so openly. But the structure of the faculty and the alumni reveals the nature. In this school there is a faculty of 7 people [all distinguished scholars etc of course] for the study of Bible, 7 for the ‘history of Christianity’, 8 for the study of ‘Theology’ [that means Christian theology if there is any doubt], 2 for ‘Ministry and religious leadership’. So out of 56 ‘distinguished’ scholars, 24 are devoted for Christianity. Then there is a subject ‘Islamic studies’ with the faculty of 8 people, a faculty of 4 for ‘History of Judaism’. There is no section for Hinduism. Wendy Doniger is part of a 10 people team for the study of ‘History of religions’. So Hinduism just falls under history of religions.

From the alumni, many are active as pastors and priests in Churches.

For example Joyce Shin is associate Pastor at Fourth Presbyterian Church. She says “Graduating with a degree from the Divinity School [of Chicago University] immediately opens doors to the vocation of ministry. I am an Associate Pastor at Fourth Presbyterian Church. At the Divinity School I learned what one professor called “hermeneutic good will,” and this hermeneutic good will is what I put to use all the time in ministry. I apply it to my exegesis of the Bible, to the theological insights that I appropriate from the history of Christian theology, to the history of the church and the particular church I serve, to my interfaith work, and my approach to multiculturalism in churches.”

The titles of Wendy Donigers book are like ‘Siva: The Erotic Ascetic’, ‘Tales of Sex and Violence: Folkore, Sacrifice, and Danger in the Jaiminiya Brahmana’

It is noteworthy that the titles of the books on Christianity, Judaism and Islam published by the Chicago school of divinity are quite neutral like ‘American Christianity’, ‘The Jews in the modern world’, ‘Biblical text and texture’, ‘approaching the quran’ etc. There is no ‘erotism in early Church’ etc. All this is reserved for Hindus only.

Attempts of dialogue and debate

Wendy Donigers has been constantly challenged and invited for discussion on her views by many people and has constantly refused it. Dhriendra Shah writes

Several Hindu academics and scholars suggested for a dialogue with Penguin and Doniger (through direct letters to Doniger and also the President of University of Chicago) to apologize and to rectify the factual errors and remove the unwarranted sexuality and distortions from the book. Even an online petition was submitted to Penguin and another one to AAR (American Academy of Religion). Letters were also written to the White House Interfaith section headed by Rev. Dubois. Doniger was also invited to a round table panel on her book during the annual conference of Association of Asian Studies (AAS) in March 31-April 2, 2012 held in Hawaii but she declined it and made comments to one Hindu academic that: “I have moved beyond the Hindus.” Neither fatwas nor any crusades were undertaken as characteristics of disagreements by other faiths. A scholarly letter campaign by Hindu intellectuals bore fruit when the NBCC refrained from giving her the NBCC award for her book.

Earlier, the now defunct Microsoft Encarta pulled Wendy Doniger's article on Hinduism after investigating complaints that the article had a racist tone, thanks to a scholarly intervention by Sankrant Sanu. One or two quotes shall suffice here.

Sankrant’s analysis of Encarta

Our study begins with the main contents page for each of the religions. In some cases, the contents page contains, in quotes, a single highlighted statement about the religion. In the 2002 version of Encarta, these quotes are present for Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism, and not for Christianity and Islam.

• Judaism: “The God of creation entered into a special relationship with the Jewish people at Sinai.”
• Buddhism: “Karma consists of a person’s acts and their ethical consequence.”
• Hinduism: “Rama and Krishna are said to be avatars of Vishnu though they were originally human heroes.”

Note that the one statement that was chosen about Hinduism is that which repudiates Hindu belief, while the statements for the other two religions reflect a balanced positive or neutral stance. Notice also the use of “said to be” in Hinduism while the statement on Judaism is presented in the editorial voice as a presentation of fact. To understand this representation, let us draw up a hypothetical quote on Christianity to parallel the quote on Hinduism.

• Christianity: Jesus Christ is said to be the “Son of God” though he was just a human.

Irrespective of belief in the truth or falsity of this statement, or the parallel one in the case of Hinduism, when such a statement is the highlight of the commentary on a religion, it reflects a certain attitude about how the subject is approached. Let us see if this attitude continues to persist in the article on Hinduism in comparison to other religions.

Peaceful “Jihad” and violent “Ahimsa”

A further study about the difference in approach and attitude in the articles on religion can be found in the description of subtle concepts. We take two –jihad and ahimsa, in particular, both of which may be somewhat familiar to the lay reader.

Islam:

“Many polemical descriptions of Islam have focused critically on the Islamic concept of jihad. Jihad, considered the sixth pillar of Islam by some Muslims, has been understood to mean holy war in these descriptions. However, the word in Arabic means “to struggle” or “to exhaust one’s effort,” in order to please God. Within the faith of Islam, this effort can be individual or collective, and it can apply to leading a virtuous life; helping other Muslims through charity, education, or other means; preaching Islam; and fighting to defend Muslims. Western media of the 20th century continue to focus on the militant interpretations of the concept of jihad, whereas most Muslims do not.”

Hinduism:

“The most important tenet of sanatana dharma for all Hindus is ahimsa, the absence of a desire to injure, which is used to justifyvegetarianism (although it does not preclude physical violence toward animals or humans, or blood sacrifices in temples).” [Em. added]

In both cases, the authors treat subtle subjects in the respective religions. In the article on Islam, the author presents a sympathetic view of Jihad, and attempts to favorably influence Western perceptions. In the article on Hinduism the author adds decidedly unfavorable editorial asides seeking to “correct” possibly favorable perceptions by introducing “contradictions.” The tone of the article again is of a higher entity looking down on lowly customs and illogical “native” interpretations (as in (“ahimsa” …”is used to justify”). This is an illustration of the very different viewpoint (dare we say “agenda”) from which the article on Hinduism is written. While the articles on Islam and Christianity attempt to uplift the reader to a refined understanding of those religions, the article on Hinduism attempts to denigrate instead.

The criticism of her book

Wendy Doniger claims in an interview that nobody has taken specific objections o her book. To Quote Aditi Banarjee

‘Doniger’s refusal to address her critics only worsens as the interview proceeds. When asked why Hindus object to her writings, she flippantly replies:

You’ll have to ask them why. It doesn’t seem to me to have much to do with the book. They don’t say, “Look here, you said this on page 200, and that’s a terrible thing to say.” Instead, they say things not related to the book: you hate Hindus, you are sex-obsessed, you don’t know anything about the Hindus, you got it all wrong.’

In fact as early as 2009 Vishal Agarwal has pointed out chapter wise blatant errors in her book. Aditi Banerjee, a practicing attorney in London and also co-editor,Invading the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America (Rupa & Co., June 2007), Abhinav Prakash Singh Doctoral Scholar in Economics, JNU, Anand Mathur, Dhriendra Shah, Pramod Pathak all these people have done a pointed criticism of her work but she has not answered any of them.

The concern about Text books

In USA, from where people like Wendy Doniger give sermons to Indians on the freedom of expression, there is a process to raise objections against Text books in school and colleges and many people use it to ban the books from the institutions or from American library association. To Quote the American libraries association site

Each year, the ALA's office for Intellectual Freedom compiles alist of the top ten most frequently challenged books in order to inform the public about censorship in libraries and schools.The ALA condemns censorship and works to ensure free access to information.

A challenge is defined as a formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness. The number of challenges reflects only incidents reported. We estimate thatfor everyreported challenge, four or five remain unreported. Therefore, we do not claim comprehensiveness in recording challenges.

Over this recent past decade, 5,099 challenges were reported to the Office for Intellectual Freedom.

1,577 challenges due to "sexually explicit" material; 1,291 challenges due to "offensive language"; 989 challenges due to materials deemed "unsuited to age group"; 619 challenged due to "violence"' and 361 challenges due to "homosexuality."

Further, 274 materials were challenged due to "occult" or "Satanic" themes, an additional 291 were challenged due to their "religious viewpoint," and 119 because they were "anti-family."

Please note that the number of challenges and the number of reasons for those challenges do not match, because works are often challenged on more than one ground.

1,639 of these challenges were in school libraries; 1,811 were in classrooms; 1,217 took place in public libraries. There were 114 challenges to materials used in college classes; and 30 to academic libraries. There are isolated cases of challenges to library materials made available in or by prisons, special libraries, community groups, and students. The vast majority of challenges were initiated by parents (2,535), with patrons and administrators to follow (516 and 489 respectively).

Therefore it is obvious that although freedom of expression should preserve everyone’s right to speak and write, whether that content should be included as educational material is an altogether different question.

The publishing houses

Penguin and Orient Blackswan are claiming themselves victims along with Wendy Doniger. In a statement issued over the Wendy Donigers book, Penguin says

Penguin Books India believes, and has always believed, in every individual’s right to freedom of thought and expression, a right explicitly codified in the Indian Constitution. This commitment informs Penguin’s approach to publishing in every territory of the world, and we have never been shy about testing that commitment in court when appropriate. At the same time, a publishing company has the same obligation as any other organisation to respect the laws of the land in which it operates, however intolerant and restrictive those laws may be. We also have a moral responsibility to protect our employees against threats and harassment where we can. The settlement reached this week brings to a close a four year legal process in which Penguin has defended the publication of the Indian edition of The Hindus by Wendy Doniger. We have published, in succession, hardcover, paperback and e-book editions of the title. International editions of the book remain available physically and digitally to Indian readers who still wish to purchase it. We stand by our original decision to publish The Hindus, just as we stand by the decision to publish other books that we know may cause offence to some segments of our readership. We believe, however, that the Indian Penal Code, and in particular section 295A of that code, will make it increasingly difficult for any Indian publisher to uphold international standards of free expression without deliberately placing itself outside the law. This is, we believe, an issue of great significance not just for the protection of creative freedoms in India but also for the defence of fundamental human rights.

The hypocrisy is obvious. Penguin insinuates that there was a threat to their employees without giving an iota of proof. If the threat was real one would Penguin have dared to declare in the same statement that the book is still available to Indian readers through Internet?

Penguin’s legal battle

It is interesting to see when these companies have fought and when they have retreated.

In 1996, the British author David Irving filed suit against American author Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher Penguin Books in an English court, claiming that Lipstadt had libeled him in her book Denying the Holocaust. Lipstadt had accused him of deliberately misrepresenting evidence to conform to his ideological viewpoint. English libel law puts the burden of proof on the defence, meaning that it was up to Lipstadt and her publisher to prove that her claims were substantially true.

Lipstadt hired British lawyer Anthony Julius while Penguin hired libel experts Kevin Bays and Mark Bateman of media law firm Davenport Lyons. Cambridge historian Richard J. Evans was hired by the defence to serve as an expert witness. Evans spent two years examining Irving's work, and presented evidence of Irving's misrepresentations, including evidence that Irving had knowingly used forged documents as source material. Upon mutual agreement the case was argued as a bench trial before Mr. Justice Charles Gray, who produced a written judgment 333 pages long in favour of the defendants, in which he detailed Irving's systematic distortion of the historical record of World War II.

This shows that international publishers including Penguin fight when they are sure about the accuracy of their content.

Publishers withdrawing the books

On the other hand, there are multiple cases where publishers have withdrawn books when they found that the content has fatal errors.

Books withdrawn for inaccuracy

In 2013 Authentic Media publications withdrew the book ‘Taming the Tiger’. The statement said "The publisher of Taming the Tiger is withdrawing the book and relevant resources from sale. Authentic Media made the decision after an inquiry into evangelist and founding Director of Avanti Ministries Tony Anthony concluded that parts of his book, which claims to tell his story, are fake."

In year 2012 citing a loss of confidence in the book's details, Christian publisher Thomas Nelson withdrew the publication and distribution of the bestseller,The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You've Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson. The controversial book was written by Texas evangelical David Barton. The publishing company says it's ceasing publication because it found that "basic truths just were not there."

In 2010 Publisher Henry Holt & Co. today announced the withdrawal of the book "The Last Train From Hiroshima: The Survivors Look Back" by Charles Pellegrino. Initially, Henry Holt was going to issue corrected versions of the book, but it took a hard look at the entire contents of the book -- and at Pellegrino. "Questions about other sources and the author’s credentials arose," the publisher wrote in the press release.

In year 2003 publisher Little, Brown withdrew a book about the creation of the atomic bomb after four authors complained that more than 30 uncredited passages in it were identical or nearly identical to passages in their works. Michael Pietsch, the publisher of Little, Brown, said the company had taken the unusual step of recalling the book, "Pandora's Keepers: Nine Men and the Atomic Bomb," from bookstores because "after speaking with the author, we agreed there were errors in the book that justified withdrawing it."

We can find any number such of examples which show that the decision to withdraw the book is almost without exception linked to the loss of confidence on the part of publisher about the accuracy of the content. With the resources available to such publishing houses, it is never difficult for them to fight legal suits. That is why the Penguin statement says ‘we have never been shy about testing that commitment in court when appropriate.’

Is Penguin, after four years of legal battle, convinced that it is not appropriate to fight this case because of inaccuracies in content?

But perhaps it is shameful for them and to Orient Blackswan to admit that when it comes to issues related to India, they are not as careful about accuracy of content as when releasing books in Europe and US. It is easier to blame Indian law, the section 295 A etc.

Section 295 A

Section 295A in the Indian Penal Code says

Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of [citizens of India], [by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise], insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 4 [three years], or with fine, or with both.

Penguin and the self appointed liberals are claiming this clause as repressive [‘intolerant and restrictive’ to quote from Penguin press release], of freedom of expression. Actually it has been tested very rarely in the Court. But when it has been tested, the deliberations in the Court Judgement very clearly show that it is very difficult to use it as an oppressive measure. In the case of ban on the ‘Dwikhandito’ book of Taslima Nasreen [which was, by the way, banned by the communist government of west bengal] , to quote from the Kolkata High Court Judgement,

7.1. Therefore, insult or attempt to insult the religion or religious belief when made with an intention, which must be deliberate or malicious, of outraging the religious feelings of a class of citizens of India, then only the provisions of Section 295A would be attracted. The outrage to religious feelings or insult to religion or religious belief if made unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate and malicious intention, then the same would not come within the purview of Section 295A IPC. The expression 'deliberate and malicious' is indicative of the intention of the legislature. The conjunction 'and' conjoins both. It must be both deliberate and malicious i.e. deliberately malicious. If it is made knowingly, but with an intention not deliberate nor malicious, but with an intention oriented by clinching or revitalizing or striking a blow for the well being of the society or for emancipation of the women, which is necessary for the mankind, in that event, such outraging of religious feelings or insult to religion or religious belief, though may be intentional but cannot be termed deliberate and malicious even if it is not made unwittingly or carelessly. If it is inflicted in good faith by an author in his/her endeavour or object to facilitate some measure on social reform by administering such a shock to the followers of the religion, as would ensure notice being taken by any criticism so made, would not attract the mischief of Section 295A by reason of the phrase "with deliberate and malicious intention" qualifying the intention. In order to establish the ingredient of Section 295A to be applicable in a case it is to be established that the author had the requisite mens rea deliberate and malicious to outrage the religious feelings of a class of citizens of India and to insult or to attempt to insult the religion and religious beliefs of that class of citizens of India. The offence must be intended deliberately and maliciously for the citizens of that class in India. Therefore, we are to examine whether the offending passage was (1) written (2) with the deliberate and malicious intention (3) of outraging the religious feelings to insult the religion or religious beliefs (4) of a particular class of citizens (5) of India. The intention of the author has to be found out from the book itself having regard to the context in which it was written.

In short, the entire emphasis of the section 295A is on ‘deliberate and malicious’. After fighting the legal battle for four years, did Penguin came to the conclusion that it will be conclusively proved that the intention was ‘deliberate and malicious’? And yet they are saying freedom of expression in danger?

On what count Indian media and so called liberal intellectuals are accusing Dinanath Batra? As far as law is concerned, he is within his legal rights. As far as debate and discussions are concerned, Wendy Doniger has consistently denied it. The claims of publications of possible persecution are baseless. Dinanath Batra’s entire struggle so far has been in last 10 years when UPA government was in power so there is no question of favour of government. In last few days, media people are relentlessly yelling against Dinabath Batra and nobody has pressurised them or curbed them. Where is then the danger to freedom of expression?