Mysterious Ban

Even as the ministry, in Joint SecretarySashi Prakash's words, "is considering, at the appropriate level, whether or not Rushdie's novel has any objectionable material for the last two months", the customs authorities in a September communique to the publishing house Rupa, asked them to stop distributing the book because "the question of permissibility or otherwise of marketing the book was under the consid-eration of the Government of India".

And provoking that consideration, apart from the ire of Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray, were representations from individuals and groups in Tamil Nadu, the state more than any other aggrieved by Rushdie's literary treatment of Jawaharlal Nehru. Says Prakash: "The many representations from Tamil Nadu go to prove that the Nehru family has more followers in the south than the north."

Of course, this last was just a quip that the bureaucrat indulged in rather circumspectly—like a scrap of meat to punctuate unpleasant questioning. If you answer "being considered at the appropriate level" to three similar but differently worded queries on who was making a literary assessment of Rushdie's novel in the ministry, you do get a little sheepish. And as regards the literary credentials of the examining individual or committee, they are "appropriate literary credentials".

Which takes us straight to the question of whether the power vested by the Government in bodies like the customs can be exercised arbitrarily without the leash of a time limit. A proscribed period within which they have to provide reasons for their action in writing. Reasons for which the aggrieved party can haul the Government to court. Argues Arun Shourie, writer and former editor of the Indian Express in an article on the Government's handling of the Rushdie novel: "The principle has come to be accepted in the case of individuals who are detained: the authorities have to produce the person before the courts within 24 hours, and then at intervals the courts specify; at the hearings the authorities have to furnish reasons. The same principle should apply to books and other objects throughwhich ideas are conveyed."

With the novel subsequently making it to the Booker shortlist, R.K. Mehra of Rupa wrote to the chairman of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes, but the status quo was maintained. The president of the Federation of Publishers and Booksellers' Association of India also wrote to the collector of customs, the revenue minister, the finance minister and finally to the home secretary, arguing that since there was no official ban, the book's distribution should be allowed. While the book sold 4,600 copies before the customs hustled it out of the stands, Mehra insists it could have done thrice the number had the informal ban not taken shape.

With the matter resting there, one wonders whether state arbitrariness arising out of fear would be better than any arising out of appointing Yossarian chief literary ombudsman of the nation.