Recent events have brought the sedition law back into the limelight, with a journalist in Assam facing charges under this law for allegedly fueling discord between the Assamese and Bengali-speaking people in the region.
Historical Background of Sedition Law
Sedition laws were initially introduced in 17th century England to counter anti-government sentiments that were perceived harmful to the government and monarchy. The original draft was prepared by Thomas Macaulay, a British historian-politician, in 1837, but was curiously excluded from the Indian Penal Code (IPC) enacted in 1860. In the present day, sedition is considered a crime under Section 124A of the IPC.
The Current Status of Sedition Law
Section 124A of the IPC defines sedition as an act intended to create hatred or contempt or inciting disloyalty towards the government established by Indian law, through words, signs, or visible representation. However, this course does not include comments that do not incite hatred, contempt, or disaffection.
Punishment Under Sedition Law
Sedition is a non-bailable offense, and under Section 124A, the punishment ranges from three years imprisonment to a life term, with an added fine. Those charged with sedition are also disqualified from holding a government job, lose their passport, and are expected to present themselves in court whenever required.
Significance of Sedition Law
The sedition law acts as a reasonable restriction on the right to freedom of speech according to Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution, ensuring its responsible use. It aids the government in combating anti-national, secessionist, and terrorist elements while maintaining the unity, integrity, and stability of the state.
Issues Associated with Sedition Law
The sedition law often reminds people of colonial-era oppression because it was commonly used by the British administrators to suppress criticism. Furthermore, the Constituent Assembly refrained from including sedition in the Constitution as it could potentially curb freedom of speech and expression. They argued that it can be misused as a tool to quash people’s right to protest.
Supreme Court’s Judgement on Sedition Law
A landmark judgement in the Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar case in 1962 restricted the application of sedition only to actions intending to create disorder, disturb law and order, or incite violence. This pronouncement emphasizes that using this law against academics, lawyers, activists, and students contravenes the Supreme Court’s directives.
Sedition Law and Democratic Values
The rampant use of sedition law paints India as an elected autocracy, leading to concerns about the suppression of democratic values. The Supreme Court’s recent interventions – protecting political leaders, journalists, and news channels – underline the need to define sedition’s boundaries.
Proposed Change in Sedition Law
While Section 124A is crucial in fighting anti-national, secessionist, and terrorist activities, dissent and governmental criticism are key to healthy democratic debate. These should not be confused with sedition. It’s significant to narrow down sedition’s definition to issues related to India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Citizens must be made aware of the arbitrary application of the sedition law since the right to free speech and expression is fundamental to democracy. Hence, any thought or expression not aligned with the government’s current policy should not be deemed seditious. The nuanced term ‘sedition’ should be employed judiciously; it should serve as a deterrent, not a tool to suppress dissent.
