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

 Akhilesh Yadav launches SP’s 2027 UP poll campaign from Rahul Gandhi’s seat

Akhilesh Yadav launched the Samajwadi Party’s 2027 Uttar Pradesh Assembly election campaign from Rae Bareli, represented by Rahul Gandhi in the Lok Sabha.

Published

on

Akhilesh Yadav

Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav has formally begun the party’s campaign for the 2027 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, launching the outreach from Rae Bareli, the Lok Sabha constituency represented by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.

Yadav travelled through the area on the party’s newly launched PDA Rath before addressing a public meeting. The campaign vehicle carries the Samajwadi Party’s PDA messaging, referring to its focus on backward classes, Dalits and minorities.

Akhilesh Yadav discusses alliance with Congress

During his Rae Bareli visit, Yadav said the Samajwadi Party would contest the 2027 election as part of an alliance and indicated that seat-sharing would be decided on the basis of winnability.

He said the party would give a seat to whichever alliance partner is considered capable of winning it. The remarks come against the backdrop of the SP and Congress having contested the 2024 Lok Sabha election together in Uttar Pradesh.

Rae Bareli has particular political significance for the Congress as Rahul Gandhi is its sitting Lok Sabha MP. Yadav’s decision to begin the campaign from the constituency therefore placed the SP’s alliance with the Congress in focus.

PDA Rath becomes centrepiece of campaign

The PDA Rath was rolled out as part of the SP’s mobilisation ahead of the 2027 Assembly election. The vehicle prominently carries the party’s PDA messaging, with PDA standing for Pichhde, Dalit and Alpsankhyak.

The campaign is aimed at taking the SP’s social-justice messaging to voters across Uttar Pradesh as the party prepares for the Assembly election.

During the programme, Yadav also attacked the BJP and raised issues including the Election Commission and what he described as the alleged misuse of election machinery. These are political allegations made by the SP chief and should be understood as such.

BJP reacts to Akhilesh Yadav’s campaign

The launch of the PDA Rath comes as political activity intensifies in Uttar Pradesh ahead of the 2027 Assembly election.

The BJP has responded to Yadav’s campaign and his political messaging, while the SP has continued to focus its outreach on the PDA social coalition and its alliance strategy with the Congress.

The 2027 contest is still ahead, with parties using the period before the election to strengthen their organisational networks, public outreach and alliance arrangements.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks CEC Gyanesh Kumar, says vote chori leads to kanoon chori

Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of failing to protect voters and linked his “vote chori” allegation to what he called “kanoon chori”.

Published

on

Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi on Thursday launched a fresh attack on Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Narendra Modi government, alleging irregularities in India’s electoral process.

Addressing a press conference in Delhi, Mr Gandhi linked his earlier allegations of “vote chori” with what he described as “kanoon chori”, arguing that alleged manipulation of votes would have consequences for the country’s law-making and institutional systems.

“From vote chori comes kanoon chori,” Mr Gandhi said, arguing that if votes had been stolen, laws and institutional changes made by lawmakers elected through those votes would also be affected.

Rahul Gandhi attacks Gyanesh Kumar

Mr Gandhi specifically targeted Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and questioned the Election Commission’s handling of the electoral process.

His remarks came amid reports of differences within the poll body over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. Mr Gandhi referred to reported concerns involving the Election Commission and alleged that questions raised about the functioning of the poll panel had not been adequately addressed.

He also alleged that the Election Commission had failed in its responsibility to protect the vote, which he described as the foundation of India’s democratic and constitutional system.

‘Vote chori’ claim

Mr Gandhi reiterated his allegations of irregularities in elections and said the issue went beyond individual voters.

He argued that the vote gives power to the Constitution, while the Constitution provides the basis for laws and institutions. On that basis, he said alleged destruction of the voting process would have wider consequences for the country’s constitutional system.

Mr Gandhi also questioned what he described as the disappearance of anti-incumbency in elections involving the BJP, comparing recent electoral outcomes with earlier political trends.

He alleged that the 2024 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections had been manipulated. These remain allegations made by Mr Gandhi and should not be presented as established facts.

Attack on Modi and Amit Shah

During the press conference, Mr Gandhi also targeted Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah while making his allegations about the electoral process.

He questioned the role of the Election Commission and its leadership, and called for accountability over what he described as irregularities affecting India’s voting system.

Mr Gandhi said he was presenting evidence for his allegations and maintained that the issue concerned not only elections but also the functioning of democratic institutions.

The Election Commission’s reported internal differences over the SIR exercise formed part of the backdrop to his remarks. The claims made by Mr Gandhi concern his interpretation of those developments and are distinct from established findings about election manipulation.

Continue Reading

India News

BJP hits back at opposition over EC row, says disagreement is democracy

The BJP has defended reported differences among Election Commissioners, saying internal deliberations are part of a healthy democratic process.

Published

on

The BJP has defended the Election Commission amid a political row over reported differences among Election Commissioners concerning decisions linked to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

BJP MP Sambit Patra said discussions and exchanges of views within the poll panel should be seen as part of the democratic process rather than as evidence of institutional dysfunction.

According to the BJP’s position, disagreement during official deliberations reflects the fact that members of an institution are able to put forward their views before decisions are taken.

BJP defends EC deliberations

Patra said that if the three Election Commissioners discuss and debate issues among themselves, such exchanges should not be characterised as dictatorship. He described such deliberations as a sign of a healthy democracy.

The BJP’s response came amid reports that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections on multiple occasions over decisions and orders associated with the SIR exercise and electoral rolls.

The Election Commission has said that differences in views and observations are a normal part of deliberations within an institution. It has maintained that decisions, including those related to SIR, were taken unanimously.

Row centres on SIR process

The controversy comes against the backdrop of the ongoing political debate over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Opposition parties have raised concerns over the reported differences within the poll panel, while the BJP has sought to counter those arguments by pointing to the role of discussion and deliberation in institutional decision-making.

Patra also said the BJP’s understanding of the matter was based on media reports rather than access to the Election Commission’s internal documents. He said the documents, as reported, indicated that the SIR process was finalised after democratic deliberations and consensus.

What the Election Commission has said

The Election Commission has rejected the suggestion that the reported objections indicate a breakdown in its functioning.

It has maintained that differing opinions during deliberations are part of normal institutional functioning and that the decisions eventually taken by the commission were unanimous.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com