Activists Condemn Indian Government’s UAPA Charges Against Author Arundhati Roy

Rights activists, academics, and authors have condemned the Indian government’s decision to prosecute Booker prize-winning author Arundhati Roy under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a stringent anti-terrorism law. Over 200 individuals have written to the government, seeking the revocation of this decision.

The prosecution is based on Roy’s statement at a conference 14 years ago, where she remarked that Kashmir had never been “an integral part of India.” Delhi’s senior-most administrative official, Vinai Kumar Saxena, authorized the prosecution of Roy and Kashmiri academic Sheikh Showkat Hussain.

The accusations against Roy and Hussain stem from comments made at a 2010 seminar in Delhi about Kashmir. Critics argue that Roy’s remarks do not incite violence and thus do not warrant charges under the UAPA.

The letter from activists highlights the importance of free speech and urges the government to respect the fundamental right to express views without fear. Additionally, the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed concern over the use of the UAPA to silence critics and has urged Indian authorities to drop the cases against Roy and Hussain.

Arundhati Roy, renowned for her Booker prize-winning novel “The God of Small Things,” has also been a vocal political and human rights activist.

She has frequently criticized the Indian government, particularly under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, for targeting activists and curbing free speech. Roy’s supporters view her as a champion of the oppressed, while her critics, mainly BJP supporters, label her as anti-national and have attacked her on social media.

The controversial remark by Roy, stating that Kashmir is not an integral part of India, was made at a conference titled “Freedom — the Only Way” in 2010.

The comment led to protests and a criminal complaint filed by Kashmiri Hindu activist Sushil Pandit, accusing Roy and others of jeopardizing public peace and promoting the separation of Kashmir from India. The police have now revived the case 14 years later, acting on Pandit’s complaint.

Human rights lawyers argue that the case against Roy is a politically motivated “witch hunt” and expect it to collapse in court. They assert that Roy’s speech did not meet the criteria for prosecution under the UAPA, which requires an act of warfare against the state.

Rebecca John, Roy’s lawyer, maintains that the case is baseless and highlights Roy’s global reputation for her commitment to human rights. The prosecution is seen as an attempt to silence dissenting voices against the current regime.