“Freedom of expression does not mean freedom of defamation” – Monika Arora, legal counsel for SBAC against Penguin India

“It may be news for you and everyone else but for us it was a simple case,” Monika Arora says with an almost bemused smile, “I simply cannot understand why there is such a big hue and cry.” It is roughly a week after news first broke of Penguin India’s agreement to withdraw copies of Wendy Doniger’s book, “The Hindus: An Alternative History” and Monika Arora seems genuinely surprised at the volume of attention this story was given, both by the national as well as the international media.

Monika Arora was the legal counsel for the Shiksha Bachao Andolan Committee (SBAC), the orgnaisation that had first approached courts in 2010, following the publication of Doniger’s book. The SBAC had claimed that portions of the book were defamatory, untrue and insulted the religious beliefs of the plaintiffs. The relief sought by the SBAC was the deletion of those portions of the book that were untrue and defamatory.

Four years later, while the trial was at the stage of cross-examination, Penguin India agreed to completely withdraw the book from the Indian market, something that Monika Arora and the SBAC had never asked for. Once this agreement was made public, it evoked some strong reactions, with Penguin author Arundathi Roy writing an open letter asking Penguin to identify what “terrified” the publisher.

“The problem is that Hindu bashing sells,” says Monika Arora, the measured pace of her words belying her apparent irritation. She minces no words when it comes to the likes of Roy, claiming that “leftist intellectuals” are prone to mistake “Hindu bashing” for secularism. “Had a similar book been written about any other religion,” she says, “I wonder if these intellectuals would have supported it.” As for worries that this spoke poorly of India’s committement to the freedom of expression, Monika Arora counters it with the argument that freedom of expression does not include the freedom of defamation.

“Doniger has a history of defaming Hindus,” says Monika Arora, “and the book is filled with factual errors but just because she is white, we don’t question these things.” Some of the errors that SBAC had sought to remove from the book include the statement that Rani Jhansi was loyal to the British, that Mahatma Gandhi advised people to eat beef, and that the shiv lingam was a representation of the erect male sexual organ. And it is at this point that Monika Arora appears to become truly upset, “Doniger’s book is nothing but porn.”

It was not only Arundathi Roy who chose to issue a public statement on this issue. Wendy Doniger also made a public statement, stating that the real culprits were neither the SBAC nor Penguin India but rather the Indian law that, “that jeopardizes the physical safety of any publisher”

And it is with this particular contention that Monika Arora has a problem with.

“This law has existed since way before 2009,” she says in reference to Section 295A, “it certainly didn’t deter international publishers then so why is it suddenly being raised now?”

“Rule of law mandates that no one should be above the law,” she adds, “and if this is what [S.295A] states than what is all this hue and cry for?”

Another aspect that Monika Arora has taken a strong exception to is the manner in which her clients have been portrayed. “My clients have been called fascists, Modi-supporters and this is ridiculous!” she says, “I mean just because you talk about Hindusim doesn’t automatically mean you belong to a certain political camp!” Worse, as per Monika Arora, her clients were educated, law-abiding citizens. “One of them is a former Ambassador, another an academician, the third a historian,” and her voice appears to be tinged with pain, “they are not some illiterates who retaliate with violence.”

Monika Arora has had a fairly interesting career of her own. As a student, she was the Secretary (and later the President) of the Delhi University Students Union. “This gave me the confidence to speak I suppose,” she says about her student days, “there were times when I was addressing an audience of lakhs.” It may have been this stint that pushed her towards law, and she took up the law degree from Delhi University.

More than a decade into the profession, she seems to have found her passion. “Law allows you to get relief for any person wronged by law,” she says, “and that is what is so fascinating about law.” Over the years, she has appeared in a number of public interest litigations, including litigations against the Delhi Bar Council, Delhi University and the Delhi government.  “Anything of public interest,” she says, “inspires me to work.”