New Delhi, Dec. 1: One has called the order a judicial excess. Another said there was pride in standing up when the national anthem is played.
A third went a step further, calling for the anthem to be made a daily feature in Parliament when it is in session.
The Supreme Court's interim order yesterday to cinemas to play the national anthem before the start of a feature film, and that audiences were obliged to stand up and show respect, has left citizens divided but appears to have brought the court and the government on the same page, as some have suggested.
"This is an arbitrary fiat & judicial excess. But it is one Lakshman Rekha that this hyper-nationalistic government will not mind the SC from crossing," lawyer and political activist Prashant Bhushan tweeted.
Bhushan appeared to be alluding to the differences between the court and the government over pending judicial appointments to fill hundreds of vacancies in high courts.
Today, a recurrent reaction was that the order - which came against this backdrop - was a case of "judicial activism and overreach".
Suhas Palshikar, who taught political science at Savitribai Phule Pune University, questioned the idea of creating nationalism. "But, this is the national ethos now. And, the judiciary is not generally isolated from society. Ideally, it should not be influenced by such discourses, but that is really an ideal," Palshikar added.
Historian Kapil Kumar said: "It is sad the Supreme Court had to give a judgment on this because this is an order that should be in the hearts of every Indian citizen."
In its directive yesterday, the bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy had said: "The directions are issued for love and respect for the motherland, (which) is reflected when one shows respect to the national anthem as well as to the national flag." #The film industry too seemed divided over the order. While some filmmakers supported it, saying the controversy around it was "misplaced", others saw the verdict as another example of the assertive brand of nationalistic pride in a "changed climate".
"In Maharashtra, by a state government order a similar protocol has been followed for decades and I don't see why the same cannot be followed in other parts of the country?" wondered veteran filmmaker Shyam Benegal. "Standing up when the national anthem plays is showing respect to the motherland and every citizen should take pride in doing that."
Mahesh Bhatt said there shouldn't be any "hullabaloo around the issue", but emphasised that just like going to temples or mosques didn't make one more religious, standing up while the national anthem is being played wouldn't make people more "patriotic".
"It is the privilege of the apex court to pass judgments on significant issues and they have done it - but it should be seen only as a ritual and love for one's country cannot be whipped through these rituals," he told The Telegraph.
Screen-play writer-editor Apurva M. Asrani said he did not understand why places of entertainment should be chosen for an activity that demands "reverence of a certain degree".
Many filmmakers took to Twitter to express their opinion. "I'm a little disappointed with the National Anthem ruling. Why just (the) National Anthem? Why not Yoga as well? Also a little Surya Namaskar," wrote director-editor Shirish Kunder.
"Just like Gau Rakshaks, will now emerge another cult: Rashtra Gaan Rakshaks," he added.
"Respect has to be felt and if it is enforced it will be faked which would be even more disrespectful to the National Anthem," tweeted director Ram Gopal Varma.
Actors Randeep Hooda, Anupam Kher and Kabir Bedi backed the ruling. Bedi said "cinemas are good place to enjoy the National Anthem in Dolby sound". Filmmaker Shekhar Kapur suggested that the Supreme Court should order Parliament to play the anthem before each session.
Knowing well that every Parliament session does begin with the national anthem and ends with the national song, Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi went a step further. Gogoi wrote to the Speaker asking that it be made a daily feature in the Lok Sabha at the start of proceedings.
Former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah also weighed in on Twitter. In response to the enthusiasm shown by Congress politicians for the decision. Reacting to a tweet by former information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari questioning the criticism of the SC order and pondering aloud who would respect the Anthem if not Indians, Abdullah quipped: "The question is why just cinemas, why not every day in Parliament in that case? Lead by example."
The order did cause some unease even among known supporters of the Modi government. Swapan Dasgupta, a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha, tweeted: "I think there are more appropriate places than cinema halls for the singing of the national anthem."
Author Chetan Bhagat, who has spoken in favour of the government's decisions often enough to be pegged as a supporter, tweeted: "Stunned at SC ruling on national anthem before a movie. Imposing nationalism curtails personal freedom, a key part of what India is about. Not a legal expert, but don't know what provision allows SC to interfere in private contract between cinema owner and ticket buying audience. People peddling hyper-nationalism and breaking India's free society are same as people peddling fundamentalist religion. Those ready to beat their chests in the name of nationalism and willing to give up their freedoms for it, you will regret it one day. Badly."
