Kishwar Naheed is one of the most respected Urdu poets in the subcontinent. She was the lone Pakistani poet at the Jashn-i-Rekhta festival in New Delhi from Feb 17 to Feb 19. She had to leave midway when informed that she was invited only as a guest.
The explanation that the founder of the Rekhta Foundation, Sanjiv Saraf, gave to a correspondent shows him and the Indian government in poor light. It is self-contradictory and disingenuous. “We took a decision in the light of the prevailing atmosphere in the country. But, since the purpose of this festival is to promote bonding, we thought of inviting a few Pakistanis as guests.”
Oblivious to the contradiction, he added: “This festival is about bringing people together and we did not want that to be taken away by some incident. We did not even apply for the permission that is required from the government whenever a Pakistani is invited as a participant.”
Surely, the dreaded “incident” might have been sparked by the presence of the Pakistani guest without her reciting any of the poems that have earned her fame. It is equally hard to understand why he did not “apply for the permission that is required” for a Pakistani participant. Apparently, since no permit is required if the Pakistani sits as a mute spectator. But the government can still grant a visa. Did it give orders after the guest had arrived?
Under an official circular in force over the last few decades, prior permission of the home ministry and the external affairs ministry is required “for holding an international conference/seminar/workshop, etc.” on a subject that is “political, semi-political, communal or religious in nature, or is related to human rights”. A mushaira does not fall in any of these.
However, permission is required from both ministries “for holding an international conference” if participants are invited from “Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Pakistan or Sri Lanka”. A mushaira or a musical concert is neither a “conference” nor a “seminar” nor a “workshop”.
The Modi government follows the old circular with zeal. Saraf’s reference to “the prevailing atmosphere in the country” reveals more than he intended. Missing in the entire discourse is one decisive aspect — the citizen’s right to hear the foreigner. The State has a right to bar the entry of a foreigner. But it is not an absolute right. It can be exercised only on valid grounds such as defence.
Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says that the right to freedom of expression “shall include freedom to seek, receive and import information of all kind, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of print, or through any other media.”
The courts allow the government considerable latitude in matters of national security and in the admission of foreigners. But the onus is on the State to establish that the acts are so related. In Kleindienst vs Mandel (1972), the US supreme court upheld attorney general Richard Kleindienst’s refusal of a visa for Ernest Mandel, a Belgian journalist and Marxist theoretician, to participate in an academic conference sponsored by Americans. The court split 6-3. Justices Douglas, Marshall and Brennan dissented. More, the majority rejected the government’s plea that Mandel’s books were available, after all.
“This argument overlooks what may be particular qualities inherent in sustained face-to-face debate, discussion and questioning.”
In 1952, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists devoted an entire issue to the problem of America’s visa policy and its effect on the interchange of ideas between American scholars and scientists and their foreign counterparts. The general conclusion of the editors supported by printed statements of such men as Albert Einstein, Hans Bethe, Michael Polanyi and Raymond Aron was that American visa policy was hurting the continuing advance of American science and learning, and was harmful to our prestige abroad.
Justice Thurgood Marshall said, “It is undisputed that Dr Mandel’s brief trip would involve nothing but a series of scholarly conferences and lectures. The progress of knowledge is an international venture.
As Mandel’s invitation demonstrates, individuals of differing worldviews have learned the ways of cooperation where governments have thus far failed.”
What illiberal visa policies do is to prevent civil society from acting independently of the State, to plead for change in its policies and advocate a conciliatory approach.
By arrangement with Dawn
