Letter to India’s The Wire: ban on The Voice of Hind Rajab threatens freedom of expression in India–and in Israel › Text of the letter [hindrajab-text]

We are progressives who support pluralism, democracy and freedom of expression in India and in Israel—for both Jews and Palestinians. Among our number are Israelis, Palestinians, Indians, filmmakers, journalists, academics and activists. We write to condemn the Central Board of Film Certification’s ban on The Voice of Hind Rajab on the pretext of safeguarding relations with Israel.

India’s government has repeatedly censored Palestinian and dissenting Israeli voices. Einat Weizman and an Israeli theatre troupe were denied visas for the International Theatre Festival of Kerala. And screenings of Palestinian films All that’s left of you and Once upon a time in Gaza at the International Film Festival of Kerala were banned. We wish to make three points about the damage these restrictions will do to freedom of expression, not only in India but in Israel.

First, the ban is unlawful.

India’s Supreme Court applies three tests to restrictions on freedom of expression. The ban passes none of them.

1. Restrictions must be 'free of arbitrariness'. Yet the Board did not ban other diplomatically sensitive films, such as 120 Bahadur and The Bengal Files.
2. There must be a 'direct nexus' with the restriction's purpose. Yet film certification has nothing to do with strategic, military, and economic ties.
3. Restrictions must be 'proportionate'. Yet banning films is unlikely to achieve any meaningful foreign policy aim, so is unlikely to be proportionate.

Second, self-censorship is a vicious cycle.

It encourages others to expect similar deference in future. The Indian authorities have shown themselves willing—even eager—to censor films in foreign powers' interests. Although most self-censorship is individual, the same logic of anticipatory obedience applies to states. Conversely, when states and individuals display a principled commitment to freedom of expression, others are less likely to demand or expect censorship. Moreover, Israel's government likely would not have objected even if the film had been certified, given the volume of criticism it faces.

Third, the ban endangers freedom of expression not only in India but also in Israel.

Palestinian citizens of Israel and anti-war voices already face police persecution. In March, police violently attacked anti-war protesters in Tel Aviv and Haifa. Last year, police with rifles raided the national assembly of Standing Together, Israel’s largest grassroots movement of Palestinians and Jews against war and the occupation. And the government banned a protest by Sudanese activists outside the UAE embassy, citing potential ‘harm to foreign relations’. Both India and Israel are turning foreign relations into a blank cheque for censorship. Their close relationship means banning The Voice of Hind Rajab could set wider diplomatic expectations. But transnational censorship does not promote international cooperation or friendship. It only serves the interests of regressive governments. When they cannot justify censorship on its own merits to their own peoples, they appeal to the sensitivities (imagined or real) of friendly states and governments.

David Borenstein, co-director of Mr Nobody Against Putin (Oscars best documentary), said the film showed ‘how you lose your country…through countless small little acts of complicity’. We all risk losing our own countries. Israeli distributors effectively censored another Oscars winner, No Other Land. Meanwhile, public attention is distracted by authoritarian forces, often through social media. Both India and Israel are in the international vanguard of democratic backsliding. Governments are learning to work together to silence dissent. We hope this letter will promote another kind of international solidarity—between peoples, for freedom, justice and equality.