SEDITION - POLITY
News: Order
putting sedition law on hold to continue; SC grants time to Centre
What's in the news?
● An interim order putting on hold the contentious sedition law and the consequential registration of FIRs will continue as the Supreme Court granted additional time to the Centre to take "appropriate steps" with regard to the reviewing of the colonial-era provision.
Sedition:
● Sedition
is an offence incorporated into the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 1870.
● Section 124A of the IPC defines says whoever by words either spoken or written or by signs or by visible representation attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, the government established by law; or whoever by the above means excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law, has committed the offence of sedition.
Legal punishment for sedition:
Sedition
is punishable by the following punishments:
● Sedition
is a non-bailable offence. The
punishment under Section 124A can range from three-year imprisonment to a life
sentence, additionally fine.
● A
person charged under this is barred from working for a government job.
● They
are forced to live without their passports and must appear in court whenever
they are required.
Necessity of sedition:
1. Reasonable restrictions:
● The
Indian constitution stipulates that reasonable restrictions (under Article 19(2)) can be put on this right
at any time in order to guarantee that it is exercised responsibly and that it
is equally available to all citizens.
2. Maintaining unity and integrity:
● The
government can use the Sedition Act to combat anti-national, secessionist, and
terrorist elements.
3. Maintaining stability of the state:
● It
aids in the defense of the elected government against attempts to overturn it
through violence and illegal means. The existence of government established by
law is a necessary condition for the state's stability.
4. To combat left wing extremism:
● Many districts in different states face a Maoist insurgency and rebel groups virtually run a parallel administration. These groups openly advocate the overthrow of the state government by revolution.
Concerns of sedition in India:
1. Colonial-era relic:
● Sedition
was employed by colonial administrators to imprison those who criticized
British policies.
● Under
British rule, stalwarts of the freedom movement such as Lokmanya Tilak, Mahatma
Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Bhagat Singh, and others were convicted for
"seditious" speeches, writings, and activities.
● As
a result, the widespread use of the sedition law recalls the colonial era.
2. Constituent Assembly's stance:
● Sedition
was not included in the Constitution by the Constituent Assembly.
● Members
were concerned that it would restrict freedom of speech and expression.
● They
argued that sedition law may be used as a weapon to restrict people's
constitutionally guaranteed right to protest.
3. Disregarding the Supreme Court's decision:
● In
the 1962 judgment of Kedar Nath Singh
vs. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court limited the definition of sedition to
"acts involving the intention or tendency to create disorder, disturbance
of law and order, or incitement to violence."
● As
a result, raising sedition charges against academics, lawyers, social
activists, and students violates the Supreme Court's order.
4. Against freedom of speech:
● Section
124A has been invoked against activists, detractors, writers and even
cartoonists on several occasion to suppress their freedom of speech and
expression.
● Article 19 (1)
of Indian constitution provide freedom of speech as a fundamental right.
Section 124A is against Article 19 (1).
● Because
of callous and the calculated use of sedition law, India is increasingly being
described as an elected autocracy.
5. Improper definition:
● As
pointed by the Law Commission of India,
is that the definition of sedition does not take into consideration
disaffection towards
○ The
Constitution
○ The
legislatures
○ Administration
of justice, all of which would be as disastrous to the security of the State.
6. Inconsistent with international conventions:
● India
ratified the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and misuse of sedition law under Section
124A and the arbitrary slapping of charges are inconsistent with the ICCPR.
7. Misused to curb dissent:
● Sedition
has become the first refuge of a Government to still dissent. Criticism of a
Government is not the same as exciting “disaffection towards the Government” or
inciting rebellion against it.
● Dissent
and criticism of the government are essential ingredients of robust public
debate in a vibrant democracy.
Way forward:
● India,
being the largest democracy in the world,
has to ensure its essential ingredients of free speech and expression. The
expression or thought that is not in consonance with the policy of the
government of the day should not be considered sedition.
● The Law Commission has
rightly said, "an expression of frustration over the state of affairs
cannot be treated as sedition".
If a nation is not open to positive criticism, there would be no difference
between the pre-and post-Independence eras.
● It
is also essential to protect national
integrity. Given the legal opinion and the views of the government in
favour of the law, it is unlikely that Section 124A will be scrapped soon.
However, it should not be misused as a
tool to curb free speech.