Opposition National Congress Party lawmaker Mani Shankar Aiyar wrote an opinion piece claiming the magazine was “virtually inviting a reaction week after week.”
Kiran Bedi, a politician and former senior police officer, tweeted: “France Terror-Shoot-Out sends a message: why deliberately provoke or poke? Be respectful and civil. Don’t hurt people’s sensitivities!”
But in a post on its Facebook page, the country’s Aam Aadmi Party, or the “Common Man’s Party” that just swept state elections in Delhi in an unprecedented victory, pointed to an issue much closer to home.
“A lot of you have expressed shock at the attack on satirists Charlie Hebdo and have shared some of their cartoons as well. But did you know that doing so can get you jailed here in India?”
The use of controversial cartoons had reignited a furious debate about freedom of expression in the world’s most populous democracy.
READ: Modi gets first political bloody nose in Delhi
–
A more lenient approach was reinforced only last week when Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta — India’s third most senior law officer — said posts made “on any Internet medium which were not grossly offensive would not be treated as a criminal act.” In effect, that could mean dramatically reduced restrictions over what can be freely said in posts made on social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter.
But ultimately, the government is bound only by its written submissions, so it remains to be seen whether these verbal concessions will find their place in ink in the Indian penal code.
For now, this spate of embroiled cyber legislation is under deliberation in the country’s highest court.
Cyber security expert, Vijay Mukhi, will be among those looking to see where the anvil falls on digital freedoms. For him, the answer is simple: “Let society or the legal system decide what must be seen on the Internet, not the state or the police.”
READ: Proposal to block harsh online criticism of leaders sparks anger
