To speak or not to speak

The Maharashtra legislative council members have suggested the government to consider a code of speech that will prevent retired police officers and administrators to leak sensitive information. This is in reaction to some sharp comments from former police officers and bureaucrats on several issues from bomb blasts, security, and infrastructure to various scams.

Today the governments in power are in constant introspection from the civil society, pressure groups and the media. The best fodder in such situations is the former officials in charge of the specific departments. The Indian media regularly features opinions of these officials, who often point out loopholes in implementing schemes or executing some projects. Those in power have began to see this as an violation of official powers where certain decisions and developments must remain classified even if the official is no longer in service. When I pondered over this issue, I thought isn’t it the question of ‘To speak or not to speak ‘in general?

Increasingly the world is becoming a small place with us individual’s donning different roles at different times and through different mediums. There are no strict boundaries or time limits to determine which role are we playing at what time. You are a friend, mother, daughter, son, father whoever and also a manager, politician, sportsman, actor at the same time irrespective of the time zone or geographical boundaries. So often you find ‘views expressed are personal’ on someone’s Twitter profile, making it clear not to link or interpret comments to their professional lives. Then how does one decide what to speak, with whom and when. How does one determine if the particular conversation is official or personal?

British Prime Minister David Cameron’s image comes to my mind. Few days ago he was defending his interactions with the News of the World’s editor Rebekah Brooks in personal capacity. In my brief career many times I have had to think before speaking when casual conversations lean towards your professional role. Importantly you don’t want to reveal things that are not supposed to be shared or spoken prematurely. If this is the genuine thought behind the proposal then the suggestion calls for a consideration. But the intention of blocking fair scrutiny or critical analysis of public issues will certainly be harmful to the democracy.