Libels, Licenses, Liberties: Conceptualising Freedom of Speech in Colonial and Postcolonial India.
Analysing legal cases involving libel, rioting, sedition, and breaches of the press acts in colonial and postcolonial India, this article emphasises the continued relevance of eighteenth-century common law precedents to the conceptualisation of 'freedom of expression'. Lawyer Thomas Erskine's advoca...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History Vol. 52; no. 4/5; pp. 569 - 600 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Aug-Oct2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=180649914&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 180649914 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 03086534 RIB jtl: Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History issn: 03086534 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Aug-Oct2024 vid: 52 iid: 4/5 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 180649914 10.1080/03086534.2024.2344244 ppf: 569 ppct: 31 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.9MB tig: atl: Libels, Licenses, Liberties: Conceptualising Freedom of Speech in Colonial and Postcolonial India. aug: au: Leonard, Zak affil: Cornell University, Cornell, USA su: Censorship Common law Freedom of expression Actions & defenses (Law) British occupation of India, 1765-1947 British colonies Freedom of speech Freedom of the press India sug: subj: India Censorship Common law Freedom of expression Actions & defenses (Law) British occupation of India, 1765-1947 British colonies Freedom of speech Freedom of the press keyword: British Empire censorship common law free speech Libel press sedition ab: Analysing legal cases involving libel, rioting, sedition, and breaches of the press acts in colonial and postcolonial India, this article emphasises the continued relevance of eighteenth-century common law precedents to the conceptualisation of 'freedom of expression'. Lawyer Thomas Erskine's advocacy of liberty of speech in a series of seditious libel trials and Lord Mansfield's notable commentary in the Shipley (Dean of St. Asaph) case provided a resilient framework for adjudicating the issue until the 1950s. Changes in the Indian political climate, however, prompted varying reassessments of these findings. Prior to 1910, judges and defendants in the trials of Reverend James Long, Kahanji Dharamsingh, and B. G. Tilak mined Erskine's speeches as a resource that could help them clarify authorial intent, gauge the 'tendency' of texts, and specify the constitutional role of the jury. After this period, debates over freedom of expression increasingly centred upon Mansfield's ruling — popularised by scholar A. V. Dicey — that solely associated liberty of speech with the absence of licenses for publication. Thereafter, critics of the Indian press acts weaponized Mansfield's ruling to challenge the colonial state's burgeoning autocracy. By the 1950s, a third shift had occurred as justices and parliamentarians offered contrary interpretations of Dicey's own analysis in debating the Indian government's continued reliance on censorship laws. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd dt: @attributes: year: 2024 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|