Freedom Of Artistic Expression: A Critical Analysis By - Anindita C Bhaumik
Freedom Of Artistic Expression: A
Critical Analysis
Auhtored By - Anindita C Bhaumik
Abstract:
Freedom of Speech and Expression is hailed as the
mother of all rights, whose enjoyment is quintessential to the enjoyment of various
other rights. Freedom of Speech and Expression, includes within its ambit
various implied rights such as right to receive information, right to hold
opinion, right to criticize, freedom of press and the plethora of rights
associated with the same. This paper, however, is not focused on the
abovementioned rights but rather on the right to freedom of artistic expression
which is another implied right within the penumbra of Article 19(1)(a) of the
Indian Constitution. Such said right although finds no explicit mention in any
of the legislations of the Country, in a way, it can be said that it has taken
the country by the storm. It would seem that the trend and the rate towards
curtailing the freedom of artistic expression has not only indicates an upward
trend but rather has also assumed, in a short span of time, which although owes
its origin to a much earlier time, a rather bad form with worse implications.
Such implications include impact on the exercise of the fundamental right,
cultural right, as has been accorded vide various International Instruments,
human rights and livelihood thereby deteriorating not just the democratic
ideals but also the growth of the society. The paper is an attempt at
understanding the relationship between artistic expression and freedom of
speech and expression. Then the author maps out the various laws, both at the
national and the international level providing protection to such said right.
The author then critically analyses the status of the right in the current
scenario which showcases the role of actors- State and Non-state and the poor
condition of the artist, in India and across the world. This paper has been
attempted with the objective of understanding right to Freedom of Artistic
Expression and the possible solution to its abuse even with the presence of
laws both at the national and the International levels. Given that censorship
and religious fundamentalism happens to be the theme of the current time,
perhaps stringent response and fresh laws on the same is the solution.
Keywords: Freedom of
Speech and Expression, Censorship, Freedom of Artistic Expression, Cultural
Right, Fundamental Right.
Introduction
Art is that
form of expression, which although intangible from the point of definition
holds the capacity to make one look at things from a different angle, with the
same eye. Art is different for different people. Although art is not capable of
being defined, but artistic work has been defined under the Copyrights Act,
1957. The associated rights of the artist that comes with such protection to
art, however is not the subject of discussion. This paper does not delve in
that, it only proposes to analyse and understand the freedom of artistic
expression. The scope of the paper, however, does not delve with the same.
Rather deals with the freedom of artistic expression as provided under the
Indian Constitution, its analysis and understanding. The freedom of artistic
expression does not find any explicit mention in any of the legal statutes of
India or even in the Indian Constitution. But, only within the umbrella of
Article 19(1)(a) which provides for freedom of speech and expression thereby
deriving its legal validity.
Abovementioned
is an idea to what entails an art. As mentioned, art has either been vaguely
defined or nowhere defined, precisely, excepting art work. So, this entails
that the art work, when original, which it mostly is, unless copied or not appropriately
acknowledged, will be given legal protection and by virtue, the artist.
Speaking of law and regulation, the discipline is concerned with the interests,
welfare and as such the rights, duties and liabilities of the citizens and
concerned actors. And, if art was to be a medium through which the mind of the
audience, receiver or viewer was to be enriched by form of idea, feelings or
emotions, then it can be said that each artist has their own unique way of
communicating or using that medium notwithstanding the resultant impact of such
art. However, it would seem that there has been increasing violation of
artistic freedom. This paper is an attempt at understanding art, its expression
and its regulation in the legal scenario with current backdrop of the society
which poses factor hell-bent on being the bottleneck in the enjoyment of the
right.
If art was
to be a medium through which the mind of the audience, receiver or viewer was
to be enriched by form of idea, feelings or emotions, then it can be said that
each artist has their own unique way of communicating or using that medium
notwithstanding the resultant impact of such art. This paper deals with such
ways of expression of artistic work, which, in today’s time, increasingly finds
itself shackled on certain ground-breaking factors which, if continued will
soon become the reality of the society and the same need be addressed so as to
achieve the transformation in the society with which the fundamental rights
have been incorporated in the Indian Constitution.
Art and
its legal definition
It is quite
difficult to put a certain understanding to the term ‘art’ for it is a creative
endeavour, which some even may call an experience of the spirit- a pure one[1].
So, how does one truly define it? One cannot define it, understand it-yes but
give it a meaning, how? After all, it depends on the person who is viewer or
the recipient, it is not just the eye but also how the mind interprets it[2].
The emotive force that the recipient of such artistic work applies depends on
psychological and personal factors such as age, culture, civilisation, gender[3],
whereby a link between our cognitive mind and our emotions, feelings or senses
are established dictated by the ability of the person to reflect, accept
differing perspectives and complex issues, experimentation and learning.
Now, we
know that everything under the sun has an element of legality to itself. Art,
in a similar manner is under the same banner as it is not just the creative
expression of spirit but also, in modern times, a source of livelihood. Art as
a source of sustenance can be objected to, because it is not just films, music,
novels or paintings that are ‘art’. In the opinion of the author, it may very
well be said that anything, that has a creative touch to it, expressed in a
unique manner, instilling some semblance of value, or emotion or some idea or
even feeling in the recipient or viewer[4]
can be said to be an art. It is the perfect amalgamation of inspiration from
nature, which remains a debatable concept till this day given the presence of
ambiguities[5]
and imagination with the end result as a masterpiece transcending creation and
its limits[6]
[7].
Per the requirement of the topic at hand then, if one is to understand such
freedom, law inevitably will have to dive into understanding what art is
notwithstanding the fact that it is primarily concerned with the rights,
interests and duties of the citizenry, at large and in this particular
instance, of the parties before it[8].
At such a critical juncture when there exist different forms of art which makes
it only difficult to define the same. So, how does law regulate it?
Law needs a
precise definition as opposed to limited understanding and insights, which can
apply to situations that have arisen and that is yet to come, subject to
modification, which is where the dynamicity of law, lies. As many attempts have
been made at defining art- be it by lawyers[9]
[10]or
philosophers[11],
it hasn’t led to concrete results as it still remains intangible. But for the
purposes of regulating human behaviour and conduct vide the social contract,
laws need to be in place to protect the rights and interests primarily, of the
artist and the concerned stakeholders. To that effect, there are laws that
provide legal protection and regulation to art, that too, through the artist,
which brings us to the topic of research at hand- artistic work. To name few,
it would be tax laws and custom laws[12],
globally and in India, other than these, also intellectual property right laws
in India dealing with the moral and the material rights of the artist.
Artistic
work, per the definition so provided by the Copyrights Act, 1957 in Section
2(c), artistic work comprises of the following elements:
i)
Painting, sculpture, drawing which is inclusive of
diagram, map, chart or plan, an engraving or a photograph whether or not it
possesses artistic quality,
ii)
Work of architecture, and
iii)
Work including that of artistic craftsmanship[13].
The
above-mentioned definition shows that irrespective of artistic quality, an
artistic work will be given protection if it is original. And that holds true
for nobody can create the same piece twice. There is no stipulations or
mandates in art, its creation and within the same lies, its evolution.
Freedom of
Speech and Expression
Freedom of
speech and expression has been enshrined in Part III of the Indian
Constitution, which is often hailed as the Magna Carta, for it recognises the
human rights that underlies and as such is inalienable to a human being. As
stated and can be inferred, human rights and its evolution also has a close
call with fundamental rights in the republic of India. India gained its
independence in the year of 1947 and it was only in 1950 that India freed
itself from the status quo of a dominion, implying derivation of power from
London[14].
The aim
with which India fought for Independence was not only to free itself from the
clutches of tyranny and oppression, but also to bring about a system which is a
step further from what was mostly happening during British Raj, the
collaboration of Princes, upper castes and landlords, under the oppressive
rule, imposing their will on the marginalised and oppressed[15].
In essence, post-India, as envisioned, was not only to bring a change in the
social, political and economic landscape but also adopt the governing structure
or governance that came in with the Britishers. The latter became evident with
the division of powers between the Centre and the State and various provisions
that cede power to the Centre and Emergency provisions. At the heart of all
this, which deals with the notion of bringing change, lies the idea of the
‘rights’ of the people, inherent and inalienable to people. As stated, this
recognition of human right found its mark vide Part III of the Constitution,
entitled ‘Fundamental Rights’.
The
provisions of the Indian Constitution has been incorporated and adopted as per
the needs of the society then and by keeping in mind the days, yet to come
through intense discussion and deliberation. It was the realisation of the idea
of right, equality and liberty that has formed the edifice of the governance
system and the same has been amply portrayed in Fundamental Rights[16].
One among them is the ‘Freedom of Speech and Expression[17]’
which has been hailed as the mother of all rights, deprivation of the same
renders other rights violated as well[18].
This is because human beings are distinguished from other creatures in the
world by virtue of their ability to think[19].
And the musings of the mind is communicated or expressed through language,
which is considered as God’s gift to mankind[20].
If a person is stopped on arbitrary grounds and is punished for the same[21],
to voice out their thoughts, opinions or ideas, it lands a fatal attack on the
very inherent value that is attached to being human. And, by virtue, it hampers
the very foundation of democracy as people cannot voice out their needs,
requirements, demands or criticisms to the government which was created to
serve them, to begin with, landing a fatal blow to the notion of ‘consent of the
governed’[22].
The
Constitution is the supreme document which was serving the twin role of
continuing with what has been introduced by the Britishers and to change
everything that undermined the value, dignity, liberty and the rights of the
citizens. Now, as much as freedom of speech and expression and its recognition,
in the larger scheme of things has been to bring a certain transformation-
discovery and spread of truth (political or otherwise), the inopportune or
arbitrary use of the restrictions end up skewing the delicate balance between
stability and the notion of bringing about a healthy change, through social
institutions which these artistic works are focused on. The first brush of
speech and expression with imposition of restriction has been the laws for the
regulation of Indian Press, then, specifically, the Vernacular Press Act, 1878
which is hailed as the most repressive of all laws introduced under the aegis
of Lord Lytton[23].
As such, as the foundation of a democratic society, it is pertinent that one is
open to not only what is pleasant to one’s belief or thoughts or for that
matter, the aesthetics but also what is unpleasant and foreign[24]
which may shock, offend or disturb the audience- which maybe the State or any
other section of the population[25]
to see and/or form different perspectives. From the abovementioned, it can very
well be inferred that for the smooth functioning of the democracy, it is
essential that the opinion of the citizenry is not only allowed to be voiced
but that the same is well-informed implying within its ambit, the knowledge of
truth and their ability to participate in decision making[26]
[27].
For the growth of a healthy and perceptive democratic body polity, opinions,
criticisms and differing perceptions of public in general need be encouraged
instead of the same being stifled with charges[28].
However,
such invocation is limited by the grounds as enumerated in Article 19(2) of the
Constitution which provides for the grounds vide which such stated fundamental
rights can be curtailed. It is the culmination of this common point, where
these grounds as invoked by the State against the Citizens, who are to express
their thoughts and opinions that need be analysed and understood when it comes
to artistic work.
The grounds
so provided under Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution range from sovereignty
and integrity, friendly relations with foreign states, defamation, incitement
to an offence, security of the State, public order, decency or morality,
contempt of Court among other[29].
Now, if one is to trace their steps back to history, it would appear that,
defamation, contempt of court, sedition and obscenity has remained steadfast in
the grounds that are enumerated to curtail or undermine such said freedom. In
fact, in British India, the right of the people derived from a common law,
actually found its restrictions, in these grounds. But, later the same was
added with the other enumerated grounds[30].
Herein, it
can be easily inferred from above that artistic work which has only been
granted legal protection, derives its validity from right of freedom of speech
and expression and has been accorded the status of fundamental rights. There
are certain key nuances that need be understood concerning freedom of speech
and expression.
To begin
with, speech means communication of thoughts and ideas using sound, as has been
defined by Oxford Dictionary. Speech then, will include not only discussion and
deliberation but also dissemination because, it is not just one’s right to
speak or but also the other’s to spread awareness on a notion by spreading
their opinion or thoughts and for others to listen. Expression on the other
hand, is not merely expressing our ideas and thoughts across but also includes
the right to receive information. Freedom of speech and expression, which when
used collectively means, conveying or communication of ides, opinions and
thoughts to any person or body of persons- orally or verbally[31].
Speech and expression are intricately connected and as such they form an
inherent right for an individual whose fulfilment is a must. When people come
together, discuss and debate on matters important to them, allow others to
speak, listens to the other person, it allows all participating to not only
enjoy their right but ensure democratic participation[32].
Freedom of speech and expression includes within its broad umbrella, right to
receive and impart information and holding opinion as well[33].
Now, speeches and expressions may also be made using artistic work. Because it
is not just using sound that conveys a particular idea across. Speech and
expression includes within its ambit a wider scope including non-linguistic
forms of communication.
When it
comes to expression, the form and the content is of particular importance as it
is not just the manner of communication but also what is being communicated.
And the same has been held in In LIC v/s
Manubhai D Shah[34],
wherein it was held that any activity that conveys a message or has a meaning
is expression and the same is to be the content of such activity. Speech is
communication using sound or audio-visual instruments whereas expression is how
one communicates and what is being communicated. Such exercise of right can be
in any form, be it printed or spoken or in this particular instance, a work of
art. Vide Article 19(1)(a), a person is entitled to express by using words,
gestures, writings, sign and even by way of silence[35].
Freedom of Artistic Expression
Now, that
it has been established that speech includes not just words of mouth but also
non-linguistic forms, artistic expression, as is understood from the term
itself, is creative expression, other than just mere print of words as the
latter is distinguished from the former on the grounds of art being a tool of
making people feel and not mere arousal.[36]
It is also regarded as something which is in the process of creation[37].
It is difficult to define art or such related terms because, at large, it depends
upon the interpretation of the person, which is subjective and doesn’t
necessarily carry with it that one meaning with which the same has been created
or was intended by the artist[38].
To quote John Keats, “Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder”. And the
subjectivity has been aptly recorded in the judgment wherein the US Supreme
Court was of the view that something which may be vulgar to one may not be the
same to another[39].
The freedom of artistic expression globally has had a dicey, sometimes even downward
slope of a growth. In India, artistic expression and censorship on varied
grounds has been recurring event, since long. Artistic expression has always
attracted the ire of the population and sometimes even the State on the grounds
of communal disharmony, hurting religious sentiments, obscenity and so on.
Office of
the High Commissioner for Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as OHCHR)
through a collective report released by Human Rights Council has provided that
a collective reading of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (hereinafter referred to as ICESCR) and International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter referred to as ICCPR) reflects
freedom of artistic expression as a pivotal cultural right which includes the
right to seek, receive and impart information[40]
and ideas of all kinds[41].
This right just doesn’t only provide for what entails artistic freedom but also
goes onto bring within its boundaries the right of every person to enjoy such
creative endeavour while imposing an obligation on the States to respect the
freedom indispensable for creative activity. The same has been provided in
Article 15(3) of ICESCR[42]
and Articles 19(2) and 27 of ICCPR[43].
Apart from the two covenants, making it a cultural right, UDHR vide Article 27
also provides for the enjoyment of rights[44].
Other key international standards providing for freedom of artistic expression
include, Articles 13 and 31 of the Convention on the on the Rights of the Child
inter alia charters and protocols on human rights.[45]
A brief
analysis of all the International instruments[46]
would indicate that artistic freedom can be understood vide the following:
i)
Explicit provisions protecting the freedom of artistic
expression
ii)
Implicit provisions
iii)
Other important provisions related to artistic freedom
iv)
Positive obligations on State.
These are
the broad categories in which provisions can be found across all International
Standards. The provisions on the International instruments so mentioned above,
are explicit provisions that provide for freedom of artistic expression and
creativity. And, it is also regarded as a cultural right. The implicit
provisions are those which bring freedom of artistic freedom under the banner
of right to freedom of expression or participate in cultural life without any
explicit reference to art or creative activities. Other important provisions
show a connection between freedom of artistic expression with rights such as
that of freedom of opinion, thought, conscience and religion, association, form
and join trade unions, moral rights and the right to leisure. Positive
obligations on the State has been provided under ICESCR and Arab Charter of
Human Rights and UNESCO instruments by providing a conducive environment for
the artists to participate and practice art coupled with providing suggestions
for policies for the same.[47]
As much as
the international instruments on human rights provide for the rights, they also
provide for the limitations putting a check on the exercise of absolute right
and its misuse. It is the objective of law to ensure that there is neither an
unfettered exercise of right nor its restriction. Article 19 and 20 of ICCPR
provides, primarily for the grounds that enumerate the grounds under which,
freedom of artistic expression can be curtailed. While Article 4 of ICESCR
provides for the application of limitations which are in consonance with
general public welfare and proportionate to these rights, articles 19 and 20
lays down certain parameters which cannot be violated under the guise of
freedom of artistic expression. They include defamation, national security,
public order, or morals and propaganda for war, communal disharmony,
discrimination, hostility or violence[48]
based on such form of expression, respectively and the same is covered under
the Rabat Plan of Action[49].
Be it the very act, incitement or assistance, any sort of expression indulging
or inculcating a sense of racial superiority, hatred, discrimination, or
financing of such acts against such people of race and ethnicity or race are
punishable under article 4 of International Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination (hereinafter referred to as ICERD)[50].
Critical Analysis
In the
abovementioned sections, we have seen national standards coupled with the
International instruments and standards which are in operation to protect and
balance the right to freedom of artistic expression, with that of possible
abuse of the right. A careful look at the history would reflect that artists
have been at the receiving end of threats, violence, censorship- prior or
otherwise, imprisonment and even deaths, in some instances leading to humongous
loss of livelihood and the freedom of expression, in different stages of such
exercise of right. The motivations for such restriction, censorship or its
imposition in unnecessary instances has always been to suppress differing
political debate or perspective leading to the creation of a nation state
filled with hegemonic policies[51].
Now, a close look at all the laws would provide the following common grounds
for restriction:
i)
Public order,
ii)
Public morality and decency
iii)
Defamation
iv)
Sedition
v)
Hurting religious sentiments
And the
method used for imposing restrictions are either censorship, which used to be
trend[52]
as prior-censorship, as could be seen in the case of censorship of Sanjay Leela
Bhansali’s movie Padmaavat, Abhishek
Chaubey’s Udta Punjab, now happens to
be the trend or criminal charges against the person. Now, charges, whether be
civil or criminal and in some instances administrative or even taking note of
expression which is morally objectionable, through hue and cry, need be
exercised with caution. This is because, such charges, censorship and stigma
created by either State or Non-State actors[53]
does not only end up affecting the right to such said freedom but also leads to
self-censorship by the parties concerned- artist and those involved in the
creation of the same[54].
Criminal
charges in India majorly find its origin in the provisions of the Indian Penal
Code under the guise of sedition[55],
criminal conspiracy, national integrity, hurting religious beliefs, breach of
peace, communal disharmony and offence in a place of worship[56].
Public order[57],
prior censorship[58]
which may happen in the stage of publication, dissemination, production or even
performance and hurting of religious sentiments[59]
have now become the face of restrictions. More so, in 2018, major number of
artists have faced persecution, death, imprisonment, violence, threats inter alia.
Other than
posing restrictions which truly are against the general welfare of the public,
an environment which isn’t conducive to art and its creative expression but
rather is that of suppression, stigma and fear, in no way, is indicative of a
country which upholds its democratic ideals and provides for the nurture and
enjoyment of cultural rights. Artists are those people, who through imagination
or in the above-mentioned cases through satire explore and bring about those
notions of the society that need to be seen in a fresher perspective and
embraced for the betterment of people. As such, such an attempt at suppressing
and degrading their voice and their work, respectively, by not allowing them
the opportunity to explore, as being ‘Obscene’, ‘morally objectionable’,
‘hurting religious sentiments’ is putting an obstacle in bringing out facets
which need awareness and understanding, thereby bringing a shift in ideas,
thought, perceptions leading to well-informed deliberation.
Suggestion
and Conclusion
The paper
aims at understanding freedom of artistic expression in India, through its
various legislations and the trends that have produced itself in the recent
times. Art, which is a pure creative experience of the soul, is a cultural
right that a person can and must enjoy and in keeping with the idea of State,
every effort must be undertaken by the concerned actors to ensure the same.
Artists does not only, through their imagination and creativity, bring
something unique into the consciousness, but often than not, it also includes
addressing certain notions of life, of society, of humanity- darker and not,
which need be held before the curious eyes of the citizenry. It must be noted
that such facet of expression is only aimed at discussion, deliberation and
more so, awareness of certain situations and angels of instances. They not only
refine our perspective but contribute to the growth of the economy. Art has
played a major role in not only evidencing change but also bringing changes. At
such point, casting them as being agents working against society acts in a
counter-productive manner. Various laws although are in place and the watchdog
of the nation, herein, India, is although more inclusive towards protecting the
rights, there is perhaps a greater need to have certain and precise laws which
may deal with the matter at hand, more effectively because religious
fundamentalism and mindless censorship, despite the existence of laws, have
started to take concrete shape in the country.
[1] Alfredo Casella, Otis Kincaid, What
is Art?, 8, Oxford University Press, 1, 1, (1922).
[2] Mataichi Miya, What Is Art?, 217,
The North America Review, , 829, 829, (1923).
[3] Supra note 1.
[4] Dr. Derek Fincham, How Law Defines
Art, 14 J. MARSHALL REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 314, 314 (2015).
[5] A.J. Close, Commonplace Theories
of Art and Nature in Classical Antiquity and in the Renaissance, 30 JHI, 467,
467, (1969).
[6] Supra note 4, 314.
[7] Supra note 2, 830.
[8] Supra note 6.
[9] Supra note 2, 829.
[10] Supra note 4, 314.
[11] Jonathan Barrett, If Philosophers
Can't Tell Us What Art Is, Can Officials?, 15 J. Australasian TAX Tchrs. Ass'n
13 (2020).
[12] Leonard D. DuBoff, What Is Art -
Toward a Legal Definition, 12 Hastings COMM. & ENT.L.J. 303 (1989).
[13] Copyright Act, 1957, No. 14, Acts
of Parliament, 1957 (India).
[14] Abhinav Chandrachud, Republic of
Rhetoric: Free Speech and the Constitution of India, 1, Penguin Random House,
(2017).
[15] Ibid.
[16] Supra note 14, 3.
[17] India Const., article 19, cl.1
(a).
[18] Ayush Kumar, Reasonable
Restriction regarding freedom of Speech and Expression, 2 LAW Essential J. 255,
255, 257, (2021).
[19] Whitney vs. California 247 US 214
(U.S).
[20] Ibid, 255.
[21] Hashneet Kaur & Kritika, Freedom of Speech and
Expression: An Overview, 3 INT'l J.L. MGMT. & HUMAN. 1072 (2020).
[22] Soli J. Sorabjee, Freedom of
Expression and Censorship: Some Aspects of the Indian Experience, 45 N. IR
LEGAL Q. 327, 327, (1994).
[23] Madhavi Goradia Divan, Facets of
Media Law, 597, 2nd Edition, Reprinted 2018, (2006).
[24] Supra note 18, 258;
[25] Supra note, 327.
[26] Supra note 18, 258.
[28] Life Insurance Corporation &
Ors. vs. Prof. Manubhai D Shah & Cinemark Foundation, AIR 1993 SC 171.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Hashneet Kaur & Kritika, Freedom of Speech and
Expression: An Overview, 3 INT'l J.L. MGMT. & HUMAN. 1072, 1075-1076,
(2020).
[32] Adrita Ghosh, Freedom of Speech
and Expression: Relevance in Democracy, 2 Jus Corpus L.J. 752, 753 (2022).
[33] Association for Democratic Reforms
vs. Union of India, AIR 2001 Delhi 126.
[34] 1993 AIR 171.
[35] Taruna Nayyar, Cyber Bullying and Online Freedom of
Speech and Expression in India, 4 INT'l J.L. MGMT. & HUMAN. 2639 (2021).
[36] John Hospers, The Concept of
Artistic Expression, 55 OUP on behalf of Aristotelian Society, 313, 315
(1954-1955).
[37] Ibid, 313.
[38] United Nations Human Rights
Council (UNHRC) 23rd Session Report of Special Rapporteur in the
field of Cultural Rights, Fareeda Shaheed (14 March 2013), UN Doc A/HRC/23/34,
9.
[39] Cohen vs. California, 403, U.S. 15
(1971).
[40] S.P Gupta vs. Union of India, 1981
Supp SCC 87.
[41] United Nations Human Rights Office
of the High Commissioner, Artistic Freedom: Special Rapporteur in the field of
cultural rights, Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, UN Doc
A/HRC/23/34, A/HRC/37/55.
[42] United Nations (General Assembly),
1966, “International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”. Treaty
Series 999 (December): 171.
[43] United Nations (General Assembly),
1966, “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”. Treaty Series 999
(December): 171.
[44] UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
10 December 1948, 217 A (III).
[45] United Nations Human Rights
Council (UNHRC) 23rd Session Report of Special Rapporteur in the
field of Cultural Rights Fareeda Shaheed (14 March 2013), UN Doc A/HRC/23/34.
[46] Ibid.
[47] Supra note 45, 4-5.
[48] United Nations Human Rights
Council, 22nd Session Report of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, (11 January
2013), UN Doc A/HRC/22/17/Add.4.
[49] Supra note 45, 7.
[50] UN General Assembly, International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 21 December 1965, United Nations,
Treaty Series 660.
[51] Supra note 45, 10.
[52] Maqbool Fida Husain v/s Raj Kumar
Pandey, 2008 SCC OnLine Del 562.
[53] Supra note 45, 10.
[54] Supra note 45,18.
[55] Kedar Nath vs. Union of India,
1995 (1) SCALE 521.
[56] Indian Penal Code, 1860, Act No.
45 of 1860, Acts of Parliament, 6th October (1860).
[57] Brij Bhushan v/s The State of
Delhi, 1950 AIR 129.
[58] K.A. Abbas v/s Union of India
& Anr., 1971 AIR 481.