No thug life moment for film releases
Thug Life, the Kamal Haasan-starrer, is set for a theatre release in Karnataka after the Supreme Court observed that mobs can't decide if a film certified by the Central Board of Film Certification should have a public screening. A day after the Court's strong words on the matter, protestors said they will accept the Court's wisdom. Earlier, pro-Kannada outfits insisted they would allow the screening of Thug Life in the state only after Haasan apologised for his remark that Kannada was derived from the Tamil language. Kannada scholars contend that Kannada and Tamil are sister languages.
The apex court wisely stayed out of the language debate and rightly framed the issue as one of free speech. First, it stated that the rule of law must prevail and mobs and vigilante groups cannot be allowed to impose their will. Second, it took objection to the Karnataka High Court, which held that the situation was of Haasan's making and he should have apologised. The apex court's remark that 'it is not the business of the court to seek apology from anybody just because he's expressed a view' should henceforth guide both the lower judiciary and public officials, who often prefer to side with the populist, majoritarian or conservative viewpoint on matters involving the right to freedom of speech and expression.
Filmmakers in India are vulnerable to mob and vigilante action, especially when they engage with subjects that deal with history and identity. Films including Padmaavat (2018), Haasan's own Vishwaroopam (2013), and Jodhaa Akbar (2008) and artistes associated with these productions have faced the threat of physical violence and bans by caste and communal groups that claimed these works (even before they were completed or screened) distorted their collective identity and lineage. The fact is those uncomfortable with a film have the freedom not to watch it but have no right to disrupt its public exhibition once cleared by a State agency. This due process can't be compromised: Any disruption would result in anarchy and the denial of Constitutional freedoms to artistes.
Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
EC Cites Privacy, Legal Concerns After Congress Demands Polling Booth CCTV Footage
Last Updated: The Election Commission cited privacy and legal issues in response to Rahul Gandhi's demand for CCTV footage of polling stations. Gandhi urged publishing digital voter rolls. Following a demand made by Congress MP and Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi, the Election Commission on Saturday cited privacy and legal hurdles while sharing the CCTV footage of webcasting of the polling stations. This comes after Rahul Gandhi has called upon the Election Commission to publish consolidated, digital, machine-readable voter rolls for the most recent elections to the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabhas of all states, including Maharashtra, saying that 'telling the truth" will protect the poll panel's credibility. ECI said that the seemingly legitimate appeal of releasing the videos or CCTV footage from polling stations on election day undermines voter privacy and security, contradicting the Representation of the People Act and Supreme Court guidelines. 'What is veiled as a very logical demand is actually entirely contrary to the privacy and security concerns of the voters, legal position laid down in the Representation of the People Act, 1950/1951 and the directions of the Supreme Court of India," it said. 'Sharing of the footage, which would enable easy identification of the electors by any group or an individual, would leave both the elector who has voted as well as the elector who has not voted vulnerable to pressure, discrimination and intimidation by anti-social elements," the poll body added. It said that if a particular political party gets a lesser number of votes in a particular booth, it would easily be able to identify, through the CCTV footage, which elector has voted and which elector has not, and thereafter, may harass or intimidate the electors. The Election Commission further issued a point-by-point rebuttal to the Congress MP. . In any election, there may be electors who decide not to vote. Sharing of video footage of the poll day may result in the identification of such electors. This can also lead to profiling of the voters who voted as well as those who did not vote, which may become the basis for discrimination, denial of services, intimidation or inducement. Supreme Court order: The Supreme Court held that the right to vote includes the right not to vote, and the right of secrecy is accorded to even those persons who have decided not to vote. Video footage: Polling day videography records the sequence of voters entering the polling station and their identities, similar to Form 17A, which contains sensitive information about voters, including their ID details and signatures. Both pose a risk to voting secrecy. Violation of secrecy of voting is a punishable offence under Section 128 of RP Act, 1951 for – Any person who contravenes the provisions of this section is punishable with imprisonment for a term expending up to 3 months or fine or both.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Posters at Ooty railway station stoke allegations of Hindi imposition
Two posters that had been put up in the Udhagamandalam Railway Station stoked allegations of Hindi imposition and appropriation following which they were removed. In one poster, a quote by national poet Subramania Bharathi, transliterated into English as: 'Let us bring various literary forms and noble thoughts from all over the world,' was falsely attributed to Indian National Congress former president, Madan Mohan Malaviya. Meanwhile, another poster had a quote by Madabhushi Ananthasayanam Ayyangar, which read: 'Non-Hindi speaking too realise their dreams with simple spoken Hindi.' A section of visitors to the station objected to these posters with some voicing their opposition on social media. 'While the quote by Ananthasayanam Ayyangar can be seen as a subtle means of promoting Hindi, the other poster, of the quote by Bharathiar being falsely attributed to Malviya entirely is condemnable. As the posters have been sanctioned by the Union government, to be put up in a public space, the accuracy of such posters, and their potential to be interpreted as a means of imposing Hindi, should have been checked and vetted before being allowed to be put up,' said an activist from the Nilgiris, who had drawn the attention of the Southern Railways to the issue. Tweeting about the issue, Nilgiris MP A. Raja of the DMK said 'Hindi imposition is unacceptable! The use of Hindi in Indian railway stations in increasing every day. Especially in my constituency in the Nilgiris, the banners installed in Hindi at the 100-year-old Udhagamandalam railway station are hurting the sentiments of the Tamil people. I request the relevant authorities to immediately remove them. Tamil Nadu will never accept the imposition of Hindi.' He has also written to the Railway Minister, Ashwini Vaishnaw urging him 'to respect the linguistic sentiments of the people of Tamil Nadu and avoid compulsory inclusion of Hindi where it is not contextually necessary.' When contacted, M. Vasudevan, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager of the Salem Division of Southern Railways said the posters have been removed. 'There is no ulterior motive for the posters being put up, and they have been there for more that four or five years. We are checking how they were put up at the railway station,' said Mr. Vasudevan, who added there were other posters too, including those of quotes by poet Rabindranath Tagore. 'There are two posters which were brought to our notice, and as we do not want to court any controversies, they were removed immediately,' said Mr. Vasudevan.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
How unearthing Keeladi became a row over India's past
Archaeologist K. Amarnath Ramakrishna, who led the initial phases of excavation at Keeladi in Tamil Nadu, has become a key figure in an ongoing national debate about the interpretation of India's ancient past. His work, which began in 2014, brought to light evidence of an early, urbanised civilisation in South India. But his recent transfer and the Archaeological Survey of India's (ASI) rejection of his excavation report have rekindled discussions about the intersection of archaeology, politics and 982-page report submitted by Ramakrishna in 2023, covering the first two seasons of excavation, remains unpublished. The ASI requested revisions, citing the need for clarity on stratigraphic layers, the application of dating methods such as Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) and broader interpretative consistency. Ramakrishna declined to revise the report, maintaining that the findings were based on established scientific Keeladi site, located near Madurai, gained prominence after excavations unearthed Tamil-Brahmi inscribed pottery, brick structures, an early drainage system, ivory dice and symbolic graffiti. These findings suggested the existence of a well-organised settlement dating back at least to the 2nd century BCE. Radiocarbon dating and stratigraphic evidence indicated a potentially earlier timeline, with some layers dated as far back as 600 implications were significant. The discoveries offered material evidence of an advanced society in the Tamil region, prompting comparisons with the Sangam era and raising questions about prevailing narratives of ancient Indian civilisation, which have often been weighted towards North Indian contexts. Ramakrishna's transfer to Noida in June, and the non-publication of his report, drew swift political response in Tamil Nadu. Chief Minister M.K. Stalin posted on social media: 'How many obstacles do Tamils face? We have been fighting against all of them for thousands of years, and with the help of science, we have been establishing the antiquity of our race. Yet some minds refuse to accept it. It's not the statements that need to be corrected; it's some minds.'advertisementSince 2017, observers say, Amarnath Ramakrishna has faced a sustained pattern of institutional sidelining and political persecution. His transfer to Assam in 2017, just as Keeladi's excavation was gaining national attention, was the first clear signal of an attempt to derail the narrative he was helping construct—a narrative that unearthed evidence of a sophisticated, secular, urban Tamil civilisation from the Sangam era. His subsequent postings—far removed from active fieldwork—have systematically curtailed his influence. In his new posting, he was removed from his antiquities role and retained only as director of the NMMA—a unit that has remained largely defunct since its inception in in Keeladi, Amarnath's successor, P.S. Sriraman, took charge of the third phase and, after excavating merely 400 square metres of land, reported there was no continuity in the brick structures earlier uncovered—a claim that sharply contradicted previous findings and was seen by many as an attempt to downplay Keeladi's historical Ramakrishna's reassignment in 2017, Tamil Nadu's State Department of Archaeology has continued excavations at Keeladi. The site has since expanded, and a museum dedicated to its findings has been established. While the state has celebrated Keeladi as a symbol of Tamil antiquity, the Centre's call for caution appears misplaced—stemming less from methodological concerns and more from Keeladi's divergence from its preferred ideological Nadu's Minister for Finance and Archaeology, Thangam Thennarasu, offered a strong response to the ASI's actions. 'Crossing countless hurdles that threaten the pride and antiquity of the Tamil race, we continue to make the world aware of the richness of our heritage and language, backed by scientific evidence. Yet, some minds still refuse to accept the truth,' he said. 'To confront such denial, reports alone are not enough; rather, we carry the responsibility of changing those minds.'Union minister for culture and tourism Gajendra Singh Shekawat said the reports were not yet technically well supported or established. 'A lot remains to be done before recognising or accrediting the findings presented by the archaeologist who conducted the survey. Let them come with more results, data and evidence, because a single finding cannot change the entire discourse. We must be cautious, and let archaeologists, historians and technical experts lead this conversation—not politicians.'In response, Thennarasu suggested the central government's reluctance to endorse Keeladi's findings stemmed from treating Tamils as 'second-class citizens'.The Keeladi debate escalated as Stalin accused the AIADMK of staying silent when the Centre downplayed the site's significance, blaming their BJP alliance for the muted response. Former minister R.B. Udhayakumar countered that it was the AIADMK government that sanctioned Rs 55 lakh for the 2018 excavations. Senior AIADMK leader Mafoi Pandiarajan who was in charge of archaeology during the AIADMK reign under Edappadi Palaniswamy hailed the latter as 'Keeladi Nayakar' (hero of Keeladi), crediting him with establishing Tamil antiquity. A senior DMK leader dismissed this, saying, 'Their belated pride in Keeladi rings hollow when they put alliance politics above Tamil identity.'advertisementCPI(M) MP from Madurai S. Venkatesan, who has closely followed the developments around Keeladi, described Ramakrishna's transfer as the latest in a series of administrative hurdles. 'Transferring an official is not in itself a major issue—it is part of administrative procedures,' he said. 'But Amarnath Ramakrishna worked on the Keeladi excavation for eight years, without compromising on the truth. He was removed, reassigned and denied the opportunity to publish his findings. Only after court intervention was he allowed to write the report.'Venkatesan noted that the ASI had assured both the court and Parliament that the report would be published within 11 months, a timeline that was not met. 'Now, at the final stage, they suddenly say more scientific evidence is needed. This, after years of delays and obstructions,' he said. He characterised the actions against Ramakrishna as setting a precedent: 'The message is clear: If you do not align with our views, this is what will be done to you. This is not just about an individual—it's a discriminatory act against Tamil Nadu and against South Indian history itself.'advertisementAt the core of the Keeladi debate lies a methodological question—how evidence is collected, dated and interpreted. Yet, observers point out that the controversy has grown far beyond technicalities. It now reflects deeper concerns about how historical narratives are constructed, whose past is legitimised and how institutions mediate questions of the precise dating of Keeladi's layers and their implications for early South Indian civilisation continue to be subjects of academic scrutiny, there is broad scholarly agreement on the site's significance. 'Keeladi has emerged as one of the most important sites in reconstructing the cultural and urban history of early South India. The findings deserve open debate—not suppression,' notes a senior and political analysts argue that the persistent bureaucratic obstacles, the shelving of a report grounded in scientific evidence and the series of administrative actions against the archaeologist cannot be seen in isolation. They argue this is not about professional differences but more 'an attempt to discipline a regional narrative that challenges the dominant, Sanskritised version of Indian antiquity.'advertisementObservers suggest the implications go beyond archaeology. 'This is about who gets to write India's history,' said a political analyst. 'When the state selectively obstructs certain findings, it sends a message that history must serve ideology. In this case, it seems Tamil Nadu is being punished for asserting a past that does not fit the official narrative.'In this framing, the Keeladi controversy becomes not just an academic dispute but a struggle over memory, identity and power. As the analyst observed, 'The excavation trenches of Keeladi are turning into battlegrounds—not only over potsherds and carbon dates, but over who belongs in the centre of India's civilisational story.'Subscribe to India Today Magazine
