Policing the free thought: Should Bangla Academy screen manuscripts?

As always, Bangladesh Police is worried about books at the Amar Ekushey Book Fair. They urged Bangla Academy to screen manuscripts before they are allowed at the book fair in the future so they don't destabilise the government, make anti-national statements, incite communal tensions, or disrupt social harmony. 

Requesting Bangla Academy to ensure that no "provocative books" make it to the fair, DMP Commissioner SM Sazzat Ali said that books should be "scanned, vetted, and then presented." 

Last time we had books banned or publishers denied stalls for publishing books of authority's disliking, Sheikh Hasina was in power. The repressive regime's all-encompassing claws did control what publishers presented at the book fair, like they did in all other mediums of expression. 

Then 5 August happened, and Hasina was toppled. So, when police in post-Hasina Bangladesh urge authorities to screen books, this begs the question: Are Hasina's structure and mechanism still at play?

The idea of pre-screening manuscripts, after all, is problematic as it effectively turns the state into an arbiter of acceptable thought, contradicting democratic principles, freedom of expression, and thoughts. 

Mahabubur Rahman of Adarsha Prakashani was one of the victims of the previous regime who was not allotted a stall in the book fair of 2023 for publishing several books that the Hasina regime didn't like. The recent comments from the top police officials upset Mahabub as he labelled it a manifestation of "fascist mentality," pointing out that such restrictions cannot suppress ideas in the digital age. 

"Thinking, creativity, writing—these can never be stopped like this. In the age of technology, you can stop a group from entering the field, but you can't shut its mouth in any way. Those who deny this reality live in a fool's paradise," he said. 

"Thoughts have to be confronted with thoughts," he added. 

Mahabub is not alone. The writing and publishing community at large has condemned the idea that DMP officials floated. Bangladeshi writer Mohammad Nazim Uddin found this proposal alarming. 

"When the Awami League took such a step, it was the ultimate form of fascism. The fact that a police officer of this government would echo such words again is not only disappointing but also extremely alarming," he added. 

And speaking of communal or social harmony at a sensitive time like this, it could be considered a valid attempt, but if steps as police demanded are seriously taken, it will eventually be considered to stifle dissent rather than protect communal harmony.

But then again, another question arises: What about the prevention of books that might incite communal tension? Is it not the responsibility of the state to take preventive measures, such as preemptive censorship? 

Rezaul Karim Rony, a thinker and editor of Joban Magazine, thinks the state's responsibility doesn't entail preventing even the books that might incite tensions. 

Rony said that if a book contains harmful rhetoric, it should be challenged in the public sphere, not banned by the state. 

"Writers should have unconditional freedom. If they hurt the feelings of any community, they will face criticism, but that doesn't mean they should be silenced. Freedom comes with responsibility, but that responsibility should be ensured by the individual, not the state," he said, adding the individual will face consequences when his content incites violence, but when the state takes responsibility for preemptive censure of thoughts, it "behaves like terror."

The fundamental issue is not only about preventing potentially inflammatory books but about the broader implications of state intervention in creative expression. It is not unusual of authorities to invoke the many pretexts to justify censorship, but Rony argues, "Communal harmony is always destroyed at the upper tier." 

Thinkers, authors, and publishers believe that if the authorities genuinely wish to maintain communal harmony, they should focus on fostering critical thinking rather than policing literature. Book fairs like Amar Ekushey should be a space where ideas, even controversial ones, can be debated rather than suppressed. The role of the state should be to facilitate such dialogue, not to dictate what can or cannot be written. 

"If the government doesn't clarify its positions on this, then we will have to protest again. There is no other way," Nazim Uddin said. 

Rony said, "When someone from the police high command speaks in this language, it should be understood that the state has not learnt from the political paradigm shift that took place in Bangladesh after the 5 August uprising." 

Masum Billah/Journalist. Illustration: TBS