Of freedom, rights, and duties

Known Unknowns

The recent news of Mahsa (Jina) Amini’s death reminded me of the song from the movie Cocktail, which goes – the world applies its moral boundaries on me; little do they know that I am not of this world. The confinement death of Mahsa Amini over how she wore her hijab has set in motion a wave of women-led protests in Iran and a global debate on women’s rights. This comes at a time when the protests over the US Supreme Court ruling on abortion rights have barely cooled off, while in India, the protests over the release of Bilkis Bano’s rapists have placed the case in front of the Supreme Court. World over, the spotlight is on freedom, rights, and duties.

Freedom is an emotional topic, represented by flags and anthems, heroes and martyrs, and rights for guns and speech, amongst others. Maybe freedom ought to, instead, be measured by the state of women in the region. Freedom would then have an inverse relation to the restrictions placed uniquely on women, their movement, dressing, and expression.

We had an English Cocker Spaniel at home named Buro (pronounced Budo). Buro was the gentlest and happiest soul. His happiest moment was when he heard the word ‘leash’. In Buro’s world, the word ‘leash’ translated to ‘walk’ and ‘outdoors’. Buro might have felt most free when he was on a leash, but that should not be how freedom is defined. Culturally, citizens are conditioned over centuries and hence asking them to define freedom might elicit responses similar to ‘being on a leash’.

Also Read | Hezbollah chief calls Amini death 'vague incident'

The fact is also that absolute individual freedom conflicts with group rights. As long as we are part of a society, the societal norms have to be practiced. Freedom placed in the wrong hands also might have undesired consequences, like guns placed in the hands of immature citizens. Society itself evolves slowly, unshackling the chains of previous generations mostly held in place by religion and politics. Some societies do not evolve or even regress, based on their societal conditions and insular existence. All of these are challenges, but none of the challenges gives anyone the right to treat a segment of the society unequally.

In India, the government has been emphasizing the fundamental duties of citizens, which are an integral part our Constitution, although, by design, non-enforceable. This is absolutely valid -- as long as the duties of the citizens are not held up as a deflection when the government has failed to deliver on its promises and minimum expectations from it.

One of the fundamental duties embodied in the Constitution is to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. We are far from where we need to be as citizens, on a general basis, and we need to improve dramatically. The implied standard would be to also hold accountable those who have negatively impacted the dignity of women. This accountability can be enforced only by the government.

As we celebrate Dasara, it is time to reflect on what freedom means to us, what being in a society means, what are the roles of citizens and the government, and how we can ensure that the underrepresented and weaker sections of our society partake in the fruits of freedom. Freedom, rights, and duties are not as fundamental as we think. Or are they? Can you tie freedom, rights, and duties here?

(Gopichand Katragadda, the former CTO of Tata Group and founder of AI company Myelin Foundry, is driven to peel off known facts to discover unknown layers)