ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 27th May. Click Here for more information.
Source: The post is based on the article “Express View on ‘award wapsi’: Writer’s choice” published in “The Indian express” on 28th July 2023.
Syllabus: GS1- Salient aspects of Art Forms, Literature and Architecture from ancient to modern times.
News: A parliamentary panel, constituted after the 2015 award return controversy, wants Sahitya Akademi awardees to promise not to return awards in political protest.
About Major findings of The Parliamentary Standing Committee report on “award wapsi”:
Writers chosen for the Sahitya Akademi award should commit not to return their awards in political protest.
Such acts of returning awards negatively impact the award’s prestige and reputation.
It undermines the achievements of other awardees.
The committee wants to get agreement from shortlisted candidates before finalizing the award.
What are the arguments against the Parliamentary Committee Reports?
Arguments Against the Parliamentary Committee Reports:
Independence of Sahitya Akademi:
The Sahitya Akademi is an autonomous body from the 1950s.
Initially, the government agreed not to control it after its setup.
An award from the Akademi is an appreciation by peers, not a state honor like the Padma awards.
Role of a Writer:
Writers aren’t representatives of the state.
The claim that returning an award is “disgraceful to the country” is considered misplaced.
The state should view its association with a writer as a privilege, not patronage.
Purpose of the Award:
An award shouldn’t be an incentive to conform.
It should honor individual excellence.
Context of “award wapsi”:
39 writers returned their awards in 2015 as a protest against rising intolerance.
The murder of Sahitya Akademi winner M M Kalburgi by alleged right-wing activists was a significant trigger.
These writers emphasized the right to dissent and the state’s responsibility to safeguard it.
Overarching Message:
The government should understand the protest’s essence instead of criticizing its political implications.
