This refers to Nilanjana Roy’s article “The sofa-cum-bed conundrum” (November 2). Though nobody can question Arundhati Roy’s freedom to critique or condemn the Indian government if the critique is grounded in reason and logic, her celebrity status can’t be used as a shield against the law of the land. While Varun Gandhi had to face action for his 2009 election speech (as he must), Roy, who has openly endorsed the call for the secession of Kashmir or overthrow of the Indian state, is feted for the consistency of her stand on Kashmir and “the intensity of her engagement”. This is beyond logic. The author also betrays double standards when she mocks the “politically motivated” (how else a political party is supposed to be motivated?) protests by BJP’s Mahila Morcha, while “defending to death” Roy’s right to pillory the Indian system. It seems that protection under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution is available to the Booker Prize-winning author alone.
Interestingly, though the article brackets Taslima Nasreen with Roy, we never saw the columnist coming out in support of the beleaguered Bangladeshi author. Perhaps, it is easy to criticise a system in which one has to face only polite queries from the judge under the protection of “due process”.
Ajay Tyagi, Mumbai
Nilanjana Roy has written about the Taslima Nasreen affair in three previous columns.
Readers should write to:
The Editor, Business Standard,
Nehru House, 4, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi 110 002,
Fax: (011) 23720201; letters@bsmail.in
