English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Scrapping sedition law: fake propaganda that it is anti-national

Published

on

Scrapping sedition law: fake propaganda that it is anti-national

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

By Rajesh Sinha

The entire discourse on Congress promise to scrap the sedition law, painting it as anti-national and pro-secessionist is based on a distorted picture projected successfully by the BJP to grab the initiative in setting the agenda for debate.

Section 124A that deals with sedition is only one of the ten in Chapter VI of IPC for offences against the state and scrapping it does not enable anyone to commit treason.

When the Congress came out with its manifesto promising to address a host of critical issues like jobs, minimum income guarantee, separate budget for farmers, hike in allocation for education and health, it was expected that these would set the agenda for the country in the 2019 Lok Sabha election.

However, the BJP led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, latched on to a couple of rather innocuous points like promise to scrap sedition law and review of Armed Forces Special Powers Act in specific areas and successfully projected a distorted, twisted picture to slam the Congress as anti-national and supporter of ‘tukde-tukde gang’ (separatists intent on dividing India) and the manifesto as ‘made in Pakistan’.

The Congress released its manifesto on Tuesday, April 2. The very next day, PM Modi slammed the Congress promise to wind up the sedition law, saying the party was encouraging anti-national sentiments and strengthening the hands of secessionists.

Other BJP leaders raised the pitch and to the credit of BJP’s effective, noisy propaganda machinery and dominance in means of mass communication, aided in no small measure by a passive, lazy Congress, nationalism vs anti-nationalism was back as the talking point. So much so, that many Congress leaders became jittery and criticised the party leadership for including such points in the manifesto and providing ammunition to the BJP.

“It is suicidal to give Modi a chance to build a narrative of Congress supporting anti-nationals,” a Congress leader was reported to have said.

They had not done their home work to rebut Modi and the BJP.

The Congress manifesto has promised to scrap Section 124A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) which is about government and not about the country (‘state’), and has been misused to throttle criticism.

It says: Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.”

Section 124A is only one of the ten sections, Section 121-130, in Chapter VI of IPC which deals with Offences Against the State.

Chapter VI
Of Offences Against The State
121 Waging, or attempting to wage war, or abetting waging of war, against the Government of India
121A Conspiracy to commit offences punishable by section 121
122 Collecting arms, etc., with intention of waging war against the Government of India
123 Concealing with intent to facilitate design to wage war
124 Assaulting President, Governor, etc., with intent to compel or restrain the exercise of any lawful power
124A Sedition
125 Waging war against any Asiatic Power in alliance with the Government of India
126 Committing depredation on territories of Power at peace with the Government of India
127 Receiving property taken by war on depredation mentioned in sections 125 and 126-
128 Public servant voluntarily allowing prisoner of State or war to escape
129 Public servant negligently suffering such prisoner to escape
130 Aiding escape of, rescuing or harboring such prisoner

 

It is not as if simply removing the provision against criticising the government sets people free to commit treason or wage war against the country, as the BJP has been projecting.

It is, however, quite in line with the BJP under Modi-Amit Shah to brand opponents as anti-national and call the manifesto ‘made in Pakistan’, with their cohorts picking up the chant of ‘go to Pakistan’.

Some instances of how they projected a distorted picture”

* Addressing a rally at Pasighat in Arunachal Pradesh, PM Modi said, “The Congress wants to encourage those who burn the Tricolour, do not chant ‘Jai Hind’ like you and me and instead make divisive cries like “Bharat tere tukre tukre”, play into foreign hands, disrespect the Constitution and break statues of saint-like Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar.”

“Shouldn’t we have a sedition law to deal with those who work against the country and its Constitution,” he asked. The Congress wanted to scrap the sedition law, he added.

Remarking that the Congress can stoop too low to come back to power, he said, “Is it not a step to strengthen the hands of secessionists? Is the Congress with secessionists or patriots?”

* Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath lashed out at the Congress on Wednesday for promising to scrap the law of sedition, which the party mentioned in its recently released manifesto.

Speaking at an election rally, Yogi Adityanath said, “It is shameful that the Congress in its manifesto has promised to scrap the provision on sedition, which is used against terrorists and those involved in terror activities, if the party comes to power.”

* In an interaction with villagers in Saharanpur on Wednesday morning, BJP candidate Raghv Lakhanpal said, “It appears the Congress manifesto was printed in Pakistan. Such a manifesto cannot be printed by Indians.”

“The Congress has said they will repeal sedition law. Shouldn’t there be a law to punish those who raise slogans like ‘Bharat Tere Tukde Honge’,” Lakhanpal added.

Even the law commission recommended doing away with the Colonial era relic not too long ago. In August 2018, the commission invited public opinion on the repeal or restructuring of Section 124A saying the right to free speech and expression was an “essential ingredient of democracy”.

In a consultation paper published later, the Centre’s top legal advisory body said an expression of disappointment over the state of affairs cannot be treated as sedition and India should not retain the sedition law, which was introduced by British to oppress Indians.

Law Commission of India, Consultation paper on Sedition, Aug 30, 2018

8.1 In a democracy, singing from the same songbook is not a benchmark of patriotism. People should be at liberty to show their affection towards their country in their own way. For doing the same, one might indulge in constructive criticism or debates, pointing out the loopholes in the policy of the Government. Expressions used in such thoughts might be harsh and unpleasant to some, but that does not render the actions to be branded seditious. Section 124A should be invoked only in cases where the intention behind any actis to disrupt public order or to overthrow the Government with violence and illegal means.

8.2 Every irresponsible exercise of right to free speech and expression cannot be termed seditious. For merely expressing a thought that is not in consonance with the policy of the Government of the day, a person should not be charged under the section. Expression of frustration over the state of affairs, for instance, calling India no country for women‘, or a country that is racist for its obsession with skin colour as a marker of beauty are critiques that do not threaten the idea of a nation. Berating the country or a particular aspect of it, cannot and should not be treated as sedition. If the country is not open to positive criticism, there lies little difference between the pre-and post-independence eras. Right to criticise one‘s own history and the right to offend are rights protected under free speech.

8.3 While it is essential to protect national integrity, it should not be misused as free speech. Dissent and criticism are essential ingredients of a robust public debate on policy issues as part of vibrant democracy. Therefore, every restriction on free speech and expression must be carefully scrutinised to avoid unwarranted restrictions.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

PM Modi accuses Congress of anti-Sikh bias over Rahul Gandhi’s ‘traitor’ remark

Prime Minister Narendra Modi accused Rahul Gandhi of targeting BJP MP Ravneet Singh Bittu with a ‘gaddar’ remark because of his Sikh identity while speaking in the Rajya Sabha.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday launched a sharp attack on Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, alleging that his “traitor” remark against BJP MP Ravneet Singh Bittu reflected the Congress party’s animosity towards the Sikh community.

The Prime Minister made the remarks in the Rajya Sabha while replying to the motion of thanks on the President’s address. Referring to an incident in the Parliament complex a day earlier, Modi said Gandhi’s comment had crossed all limits of political decency.

The controversy stems from a protest by suspended Opposition MPs, during which Ravneet Singh Bittu — a former Congress leader who joined the BJP ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections — allegedly made a remark suggesting the protesters were behaving as if they had won a war.

In response, Rahul Gandhi was heard saying, “A traitor is walking by, look at his face,” before approaching Bittu and extending his hand. Gandhi then reportedly added, “Hello, brother. My traitor friend. Don’t worry, you will come back.”

Bittu refused to shake hands with the Congress leader and instead described him as an “enemy of the country” before walking away from the scene.

While the Congress later clarified that Gandhi’s remark was aimed at Bittu for leaving the party, the BJP seized upon the comment, calling it an insult to the Sikh community. Protests were subsequently held by members of the Sikh community outside the Congress headquarters and at other locations.

Addressing the House, Prime Minister Modi said that many leaders had quit the Congress in the past and that the party itself had split multiple times, but none of those leaders had been labelled a traitor. “He called this MP a traitor because he is Sikh,” the Prime Minister alleged, as treasury bench members raised slogans condemning the remark.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi skips Lok Sabha reply as protests force repeated adjournments

PM Modi did not deliver his Lok Sabha reply today after sustained Opposition protests led to repeated adjournments over a dispute involving Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not deliver his scheduled reply to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s address in the Lok Sabha today after sustained Opposition protests led to multiple adjournments of the House.

The disruption followed an escalation of tensions linked to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech and the suspension of eight Opposition MPs a day earlier. The situation worsened after remarks made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey during the proceedings.

Dispute over references to books sparks fresh ruckus

The controversy intensified when Nishikant Dubey responded to Rahul Gandhi’s demand to speak on national security and references to the unpublished memoirs of former Army chief General MM Naravane. Dubey said that while Gandhi wanted to quote from an unpublished book, he himself had brought several books that, according to him, made claims about the Gandhi family.

As Dubey began listing these books and their contents, strong protests erupted from Opposition members. Krishna Prasad Tenneti, who was presiding over the House at the time, cited Rule 349, which restricts members from reading out books, newspapers, or letters unless directly related to parliamentary business. Despite repeated warnings, the matter remained unresolved, leading to another adjournment.

Rahul Gandhi accuses government of silencing debate

Earlier in the day, Rahul Gandhi alleged that he was being prevented from speaking on an issue of national importance. He claimed the government was uncomfortable with references to General Naravane’s memoirs, which he said discussed the handling of the 2020 China border crisis.

In a social media post, Gandhi said he intended to present the Prime Minister with a book authored by the former Army chief, adding that some cabinet ministers had even questioned the existence of the book. He also wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after the suspension of eight Opposition MPs, alleging that parliamentary debate was being curtailed.

After it became clear that the Prime Minister would not speak in the House today, Gandhi posted that PM Modi had avoided Parliament because he was “scared” to face the truth. Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra echoed the allegation, claiming the Prime Minister was unwilling to enter the House.

Proceedings disrupted throughout the day

Lok Sabha proceedings were first adjourned until 2 pm amid loud protests over the issue linked to Naravane’s memoirs. Even after the House reconvened, disruptions continued, preventing normal business from resuming.

Later, Congress MPs staged a demonstration outside the Parliament complex, demanding that Rahul Gandhi be allowed to speak on the President’s address.

Continue Reading

India News

President’s Rule revoked in Manipur as NDA set to form new government

President’s Rule has been withdrawn in Manipur nearly a year after its imposition, paving the way for a new NDA-led government under Yumnam Khemchand Singh.

Published

on

President rule invoked in Manipur

President’s Rule has been revoked in Manipur nearly a year after it was imposed, clearing the way for the formation of a new government led by the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA). The decision came hours before the scheduled oath ceremony of the new council of ministers.

Chief minister-designate Yumnam Khemchand Singh is set to take oath later this evening, along with other NDA legislators who will formally join the new government. The revocation brings an end to central rule that had been in place since February 2025, following the resignation of then chief minister N Biren Singh.

Assembly status during central rule

During the period of President’s Rule, the Manipur Legislative Assembly remained in suspended animation, meaning it was neither functioning nor dissolved. With the restoration of the elected government, legislative activity is expected to resume.

Khemchand Singh, 61, belongs to the Meitei community. Two deputy chief ministers have been named to reflect Manipur’s ethnic diversity. Nemcha Kipgen, from the Kuki community, and Losii Dikho, from the Naga community, are set to take charge as deputy chief ministers.

According to people with direct knowledge of the matter, Nemcha Kipgen is likely to take oath from a Manipur government guesthouse in Delhi.

Key portfolios and leadership choices

Seven-time MLA from Bishnupur district, Govindas Konthoujam, said he has been entrusted with the Home portfolio. Emphasising stability and law and order, he said he remains committed to serving the state with discipline and restraint.

Sources said Khemchand Singh is viewed within the party as a non-polarising leader who is acceptable across internal factions at a time of political transition. While he is yet to be tested in governance, he is seen as a steady administrative choice capable of providing organisational discipline and continuity amid uncertainty.

Uneasy peace continues in Manipur

The formation of the new government comes against the backdrop of continued tension in Manipur, nearly three years after violence erupted between the Meitei community in the valley areas and the Kuki tribes in several hill districts.

A section of Kuki groups has been demanding a separate administrative arrangement, with negotiations involving multiple insurgent groups operating under two umbrella organisations that are signatories to the suspension of operations agreement.

In recent weeks, some Kuki civil society organisations have stated they would not participate in the Manipur government and have distanced themselves from Kuki MLAs expected to join the new administration.

A day before the announcement of the new government, Kuki leader Paolienlal Haokip posted on X that representatives of the Kuki Zo people could not take part in leadership selection without justice and a written commitment for political settlement.

Diverging demands from communities

Meitei civil society groups have maintained that all internally displaced persons should be allowed to return home safely, even as dialogue continues. However, Kuki leaders have insisted that a political solution in the form of a separate administration must come first, before discussions on rehabilitation and return from relief camps.

Meitei leaders have countered this position, arguing that the demand reflects an ethnocentric territorial claim and that humanitarian issues should be addressed alongside negotiations, as no area is exclusively inhabited by a single community.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com