English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Criticising the country is not sedition, free speech implies right to offend: Law Commission

Published

on

Criticising the country is not sedition, free speech implies right to offend: Law Commission

It is time to rethink or even repeal the controversial provision of sedition, Section 124A, from the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Law Commission has said.

Dissent and criticism of the government or the country are essential ingredients of a robust public debate in a vibrant democracy and an “expression of frustration over the state of affairs cannot be treated as sedition,” the Law Commission has said.

The Law Commission report said that a person should not be charged with sedition for “merely expressing a thought that is not in consonance with the policy of the Government of the day”.

Just a couple of days earlier, the Supreme Court termed dissent as the “safety valve” of a democracy, while hearing a plea against arrests of Dalit and human rights activists and intellectuals over allegations of ‘conspiring against the State’, a move that reignited the public outcry over the Narendra Modi government’s practice of stamping out any criticism and going viciously after anyone who criticizes its policies and politics.

On August 28, human rights activists Sudha Bharadwaj, Arun Ferreira, Vernon Gonsalves, Gautam Navalakha and Varavara Rao were arrested during pan-India raids by the Pune police. While the police had initially claimed that the activists were being arrested for their role in planning the Elgar Parishad event at Bhima-Koregaon in Pune, Maharashtra on December 31 and inciting the clashes between Dalits and upper caste Marathas that broke out the following day, the cops later alleged that the activists were involved in a conspiracy against the Modi government and were also aiding Naxalites.

The activists and their comrades have rubbished these allegations and claimed that they are being hounded by the police at the behest of the BJP government in the state and the Modi regime at the centre for voicing opinions that challenge the political establishment and its claims on governance.

Underlining that “singing from the same book is not a benchmark of patriotism”, the Law Commission, headed by Justice (retired) B S Chauhan said in a consultation paper on sedition law (124A IPC) that the stringent sedition law should be invoked only in cases “where intention” behind the act is to “disrupt public order or to overthrow the Government with violence and illegal means”.

The Law Commission’s consultation paper on the sedition law, thus, comes at a critical juncture.

Sedition cases being slapped against anyone criticizing the Modi government, the Prime Minister or chief ministers of BJP-ruled states, particularly on social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, has become the order of the day.

“The Commission hopes a healthy debate will take place among the legal luminaries, lawmakers, Government and non-Government agencies, academia, students and above all, the general public, on the above issues, so that a public-friendly amendment could be brought about,” the Commission has said in its paper.

Defending the constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of speech and expression, the panel said: “In a democracy, singing from the same book 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 act is to disrupt public order or to overthrow the Government with violence and illegal means.”

In an unambiguous endorsement of a citizen’s right to dissent, or even offend, the Law Commission has said: “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.”

The consultation paper adds further: “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. While it is essential to protect national integrity, it should not be misused as a tool to curb 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.”

The Commission has invited public opinion on the prospect of either redefining or doing away with Section 124A in the “largest democracy of the world, considering that right to free speech and expression is an essential ingredient of democracy.” Why should India retain sedition when the British, who introduced sedition to oppress Indians, have themselves abolished the law in their country, the Commission asked.

Sedition attracts imprisonment from three years to life.

India News

PM Modi urges people to read Tirukkural on Thiruvalluvar Day

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thiruvalluvar Day appealed to people to read the Tirukkural, calling it a reflection of the humane and harmonious ideals of Tamil philosopher-poet Thiruvalluvar.

Published

on

pm modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday urged people across the country to read the Tirukkural, highlighting its enduring relevance and the intellectual legacy of Tamil philosopher-poet Thiruvalluvar.

Marking Thiruvalluvar Day, which coincides with the Pongal celebrations every year, the prime minister paid tribute to the revered scholar, describing him as a symbol of harmony, compassion and Tamil cultural excellence.

In a message shared on social media platform X, Modi said Thiruvalluvar’s works and ideals continue to inspire countless people even today. He noted that the philosopher envisioned a society rooted in compassion and balance.

The prime minister encouraged citizens to engage with the Tirukkural, a classical Tamil text that deals with various aspects of human life, ethics and governance, calling it a window into the profound intellect of Thiruvalluvar.

Thiruvalluvar Day is observed annually to honour the philosopher-poet, whose literary contributions remain central to Tamil culture and thought.

Continue Reading

India News

BJP, Thackerays or Pawars: Maharashtra civic body poll results awaited today

Counting of votes for 29 municipal corporations in Maharashtra, including the key BMC and Pune civic bodies, begins today, with BJP, Thackerays and Pawars awaiting crucial results.

Published

on

The political balance in Maharashtra’s urban centres will become clearer today as votes are counted for elections to 29 municipal corporations across the state. The results are keenly awaited amid high-stakes contests involving the BJP, the Thackeray cousins and the reunited Pawar factions.

Polling was held for 2,869 seats across 893 wards, with 3.48 crore eligible voters deciding the fate of 15,931 candidates. Counting is scheduled to begin at 10 am.

Mumbai and Pune in sharp focus

All eyes are on Mumbai, where the contest for the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has drawn statewide attention. Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray joined hands after more than two decades in a bid to reclaim control of the country’s richest civic body.

The BMC, which has an annual budget of over Rs 74,400 crore, went to polls after a nine-year gap, following a four-year delay. A total of 1,700 candidates contested the 227 seats.

Exit polls suggest a strong performance by the BJP–Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) alliance in Mumbai. An aggregate of multiple surveys projects the ruling alliance ahead, with the Shiv Sena (UBT) and allies trailing, while the Congress is expected to secure a limited number of seats. Exit polls have also indicated possible voting consolidation among Maratha and Muslim voters behind the Thackeray-led alliance, while women and young voters may tilt towards the BJP.

The last BMC election in 2017 saw the undivided Shiv Sena retain control of the civic body it had dominated for decades.

In Pune, the spotlight is on the unusual alliance between rival NCP factions led by Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar. Exit polls indicate the BJP could emerge as the largest party in the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC), with both NCP factions and the Shiv Sena also expected to secure a share of seats.

Statewide counting underway

Apart from Mumbai and Pune, counting will take place in several other key municipal corporations, including Thane, Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivli, Nagpur, Nashik, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar, Solapur, Kolhapur, Amravati, Akola, Jalgaon, Malegaon, Latur, Dhule, Jalna, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad, Nanded-Waghala, Chandrapur, Parbhani, Panvel, Bhiwandi-Nizampur, Ulhasnagar, Ahilyanagar and Ichalkaranji.

With major parties treating these civic polls as a referendum on their urban appeal ahead of future state and national elections, today’s results are expected to shape Maharashtra’s political narrative in the months to come.

Continue Reading

India News

Supreme Court flags risk of lawlessness, pauses FIRs against ED officers in Bengal case

The Supreme Court paused FIRs against ED officers in the Bengal I-PAC raid case, warning that obstruction of central probes could lead to lawlessness and seeking responses from the Centre and state.

Published

on

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a sharp rebuke to the Mamata Banerjee-led West Bengal government, pausing FIRs lodged against officers of the Enforcement Directorate over searches linked to political consultancy I-PAC. The court said the case raises serious questions about interference in investigations and warned that failure to address them could lead to “lawlessness”.

A bench of Justice Prashant Mishra and Justice Vipul Pancholi sought replies from the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Department of Personnel and Training, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress government on the ED’s plea. The central agency has also sought the suspension of Bengal Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar and Kolkata Police Commissioner Manoj Kumar Verma, and a probe by the CBI. The matter will be heard next on February 3.

The ruling follows a standoff between the ED and the Bengal government after the agency conducted searches at premises linked to I-PAC, which manages election campaigns for the Trinamool Congress, in connection with a corruption case.

Court questions obstruction of central probes

Recording its prima facie view, the Supreme Court said the petition raised a “serious issue” concerning investigations by central agencies and possible obstruction by state authorities.

“There are larger questions which emerge and if not answered shall lead to lawlessness. If central agencies are working bona fide to probe a serious offence, a question arises: Can they be obstructed by party activities?” the bench observed.

Earlier in the day, the court also expressed disturbance over scenes of chaos in the Calcutta High Court during a hearing related to the same dispute.

ED alleges interference, seeks action against top cops

The Enforcement Directorate accused the West Bengal administration of interfering with its searches and investigation. Appearing for the agency, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleged that evidence was removed from the residence of an I-PAC co-founder and argued that such actions could encourage state police officers to aid and abet obstruction. He sought suspension of senior police officials.

Describing the disruption in the Calcutta High Court on January 9, Mehta called it “mobocracy”, saying a group of lawyers unconnected to the case disrupted proceedings, forcing an adjournment. The bench asked whether the high court had been turned into a protest site, to which Mehta responded that messages had circulated calling lawyers to gather at a specific time.

Banerjee’s counsel defends move, cites election confidentiality

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mamata Banerjee, questioned the timing of the ED’s presence in Bengal ahead of Assembly elections. He said the last development in the coal scam case dated back to February 2024 and argued that I-PAC handled election-related work under a formal contract with the Trinamool Congress.

According to Sibal, election data stored at the premises was confidential and critical to campaign strategy. He said the party leadership had a right to protect such information.

Representing the Bengal government and the DGP, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi referred to the January 9 disruption but argued it could not justify parallel proceedings in different courts. The bench responded that emotions “cannot go out of hand repeatedly”.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com