Home / FREEDOM OF SPEECH / Nov 07 - Nov 13, 2026 / FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION! By Cleofato Almeida Coutinho
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION! By Cleofato Almeida Coutinho
No Comments on FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION! By Cleofato Almeida Coutinho

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION! By Cleofato Almeida Coutinho

FREEDOM OF SPEECH, Nov 07 - Nov 13, 2026 November 7, 2026 , by

This is the text of a speech delivered at ‘Fearless Voice: An Evening for Goa’s Future’ meet held at Hotel Delmon on Saturday, October 31, 2026. It was an evening to celebrate octogenarian Adv Uday Bhembre’s fearless YouTube Convention and pioneers who fought for freedom of speech and expression in the world at large and Goa…

BENJAMIN Franklin was spot on when he said “Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is a dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins”. Free speech is the blood line of democracy. It allows people to voice their opinions and serves as a foundational pillar that shapes, protects and sustains democratic governance. It is the core of liberal democracy. But when law is no longer acts shield from arbitrary power liberal democracy retains only a procedural share forfeiting its constitutional soul.
Freedom of speech and right to dissent are the two pillars that separate genuine democracy from a mere majoritarian one. Elections may make it a structural frame of democracy, but it is free speech that ensures citizens make informed choices hold leaders accountable and participate in governance. Dissent is the flavor that prevents the system from democracy interference. Dissent is often disrupted unpopular and for the majority but it is essential to protect rights bring in element of justice.
The measure of a democracy is not how a state treats compliant citizens but how it protects those who stand up to say ‘the system is wrong it must change.”

21st CENTURY
WE are in the 21st century. Freedom of speech in a democracy is as old as human civilization. It was around the 5th century BC that the Athenian democratic system introduced to distinct but complimentary concepts which was absolute backdrop of their political life. Isegoria (Equal speech) i.e. every free adult male, male citizen had a equal right to speak, debate and propose. And Parrhesia (Frank speech) where a citizen was expected to be candid and bold.
Even during English civil war 1644 John Milton opposed pre-publication censorship. John Lock in late 17th century favoured little state control. John Stalwart Mill who is considered defender of liberty had three principles (i) silencing dissenting voice runs the risk of suppressing the actual truth. (ii) Even false opinions have value and(iii) most opinions contained only part of the truth.
These philosophical statements in the 17th and 18th centuries fueled the political revolutions in the 18th century by the French declaration of rights in 1789 which declared free communication of ideas and opinions to be one of the most precious rights of men and the US First amendment in US in 1791 which placed constitutional barrier against the government in free speech. These were the foundational principles of free speech in our constitution in 1950.
Imagine democracy in 1975 without Indian Express and Himmat. The results of 1977 proves that Indians viewed freedom of speech and expression and not negotiable. In 1970 only because of the first amendment investigative journalists could unravel the water gate scandal. Unraveling freedom of speech and expression holding power accountable. Had it not been for the free flow of investigation protected by the first amendment President Nixon may not have resigned. For decades soviet backed regime suppressed free speech and political opposition in Czechoslovakia. The underground network of writers, intellectuals and students continue to share banned literature and ideas and in 1989 when the velvet revolution happened the underground channels of speech led to capture of power.

DISSENT IS NOT TREASON
HAD it not been for persistent dissent by Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu which dissent was treated as treason, the system of apartheid may have continued till today. Had it not being for Suffragette movement women may have continued to be excluded from political processes. The 240-mile march in 1930 called the salt march by Mahatma Gandhi against the British salt monopoly, dismantled the interior structure and laid down work for a democratic India.
History of suppressed speech is actual a comedy of errors. In Romania Nicolee Ceausescu banned the game of scrabble calling with subversive overtly intellectual. It was banned as communist control over western culture and independent thinking. In China the government banned images of Winnie de poo because of the physical resemblance between the cult honey loving bear and their supreme leader. They even mobilize global super power to ease the cartoon bear from the internet.
Present day autocratic do not dismantle democracies overnight through military courts and suppression of constitutions but they do it in a sophisticated way by building a formal architecture of law, procedures that hollow out democratic institutions. Similarly freedom of speech and expression is controlled not by formal censorship but by a legal architecture of laws where definitions of national security, terrorism sovereignty, sedition words like endangering public order etc. etc. All this when built covered with a patriotic flavor makes a deadly combination. NGO restrictions, filing of cases at places far away from where the alleged offender lives leads to inconvenience, financial loss and fear of police and courts which are located at faraway places.
Liberal democracy is under danger as law is weaponized against free speech. There is no rule of law but rule by law. Giving Chilling effect and self-censorship: Because legal mechanisms appear ordinary and institutionalized, they foster widespread self-censorship. Academics, media organizations, civil society groups. And private citizens temper their speech and activism to avoid being entangled in legal harassment.
In Hungary and Serbia where the ruling autocrats have been voted out the mainstream media and the tabloids backing the regimes which have been voted out had to run for cover and actually have to publicly apologize for wrong reporting. The press freedom index of Serbia was at 104 while that of Hungary it was standing at 74, far above India’s standing at 157.

FREEDOM INDEX
THE free fall to 157 places in the world press freedom index has brought how fragile our freedom is and the failure of the constitutional protection make no mistake about it. We are below Palestine, Pakistan 153rd, Bangladesh 152. The report identifies several factors for India decline. Colonial-era laws- including sedition, criminal defamation, and snit-state activity provisions- continue to be deployed against journalists the Unlawful Activities (prevention) Act has been increasingly invoked in cases involving reporters covering Kashmir and minority communities. Recent legislative developments, including the Telecommunications Act and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, expand the State’s regulatory reach over digital media. Economic dependency compounds the problem: RSF notes that Indian media organizations rely heavily on government advertising revenue, structural compromising editorial independence. The result is a landscape where critical journalists face harassment campaigns, coordinated online abuse, arbitrary arrest, and what amounts to judicially assisted silencing.
Despite intimidation by the state and non-state actors through social media groups there has been determined bid to resist. Independent media have always raised their voice. The main stream media has given way to digital media which is far more independent. Uday Bhembre is a shining example of how even at his age, one can keep free speech alive at a time when tolerance for dissent is shrinking.
Our job is to keep speaking, keep writing, keep mocking the absurd. We must protect our comedians, writers, poets and whistleblowers. Protect our right to be offensive, protect our right to be wrong, speak your mind out to question the system. If we keep quiet, we normalize the dismantling of democracy. The right to reclaim free speech must continue by citizens who refused to be silenced. It was John Stewart Mill who argued that silencing any opinion is a crime against humanity.

No related posts.

Search

Back to Top