The British used the sedition law against Bal Gangadhar Tilak twice. Tilak was an icon of India’s freedom struggle in the days before Gandhi took centre stage. Tilak was a radical. He was vocal against Gandhi’s passive resistance; he was also opposed to moderate Congress leaders. In fact, Tilak saw nothing wrong in using violence and force and was popular with revolutionaries like Aurobindo Ghose.
Hailed as “Lokmanya” which means a loved public leader, Tilak’s first imprisonment on a sedition charge came in 1897, after he published articles criticizing the British clamp-down on travel, forced house inspections and medication to stop the spread of a plague epidemic. His articles, which even cited the Bhagwad Gita to counter the government’s measures, indirectly triggered two Maharashtrian youth to murder British officers. The second jail term was for six years after Tilak wrote a series of articles in 1908 to defend two Bengali youth who tried to blow up a Calcutta magistrate. The bomb ended up killing two women instead.
The British had introduced the sedition law to reign in intellectuals who opposed their governance. But, Tilak’s arrests only increased his popularity and the circulation of his nationalist newspaper, the Kesari soared. Irrespective of the logic and the rationale of his actions (Tilak also opposed the introduction of the 1891 Age of Consent Bill to raise legal marriageable age for girls from 10 to 12) he was hailed as a true nationalist, still is.
The tables have turned. We are back to square one. The sedition law, which still exists as Section 124A in the Indian Penal Code, is now being used to single out our own. More often than not, as has been observed in recent times, it is used against free-thinking, free-speaking citizens. It is a ready weapon to thwart dialogue, to threaten and to intimidate. It is used as an extremely lazy ploy to quiet intellectual opposition.
On February 9, Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi allegedly reverberated with slogans hailing Afzal Guru, who was executed for involvement in the December 2001 Parliament attack. Some students had reportedly organized an event to discuss “the judicial killing of Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhat” and controversial videos of sloganeering went viral. Subsequently, JNU Student Union President Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested on sedition charges.
Several eminent lawyers, including Fali S Nariman, eminent jurist and senior advocate at Supreme Court and Soli Sorabjee, former Attorney General of India, have commented how arresting Kanhaiya Kumar on a sedition charge is not legally sound. On Wednesday, students of Jadavpur University in Kolkata also raised similar slogans to support Kanhaiya Kumar. On Thursday, several news reports suggested that the charge might be dropped.
Like many readers, I also wholeheartedly disagree and vehemently reject the alleged pro-Afzal Guru and pro-Ishrat ideas circulated during the JNU event. Personally, the alleged slogans indeed sound inciteful, irrational and angering. But, irrespective of how staunchly one rejects these ideologies, let us also acknowledge, as a civil society, that such extreme dialogues mark a true democracy.
Political ideals are as varied as five fingers of the same hand. It is natural to have heated verbal arguments. But, the violence in Patiala House court and the bullying on social media by blanketing all opposing viewpoints as anti-national is simply not acceptable. And hey, how dare you question my nationalism?
My problem with the JNU incident is this “ that a young person accused of an exaggerated charge was verbally abused, roughed up, threatened and thrashed inside court premises by lawyers and BJP MLAs in the presence of a rather passive police force. What kind of hope can justice seekers cultivate if lawmakers and law keepers show such immaturity and impunity?
The problem is also this “ that I, who is as legit a citizen of India as you claim to be - am being bullied into believing someone else’s idea of nationalism. My allegiance to my country is as deeply personal as praying in my private space. Who are you “ honourable lawyers, politicians, just about anyone “ to decide whether I am nationalistic enough?
The likes of Tilak, who were ferocious, aggressive, highly individualistic thinkers and who braved harsh jail terms on sedition charges would be certainly aghast at the kind of dull intellectual monotony and hooliganism that is promoted in the name of nationalism today.
We certainly did not win freedom 68 years back to become mute spectators / trained talking parrots / social media trolls / intellectual clones that are obeisant to one pre-decided, predominant socio-political ideology. Even after 68 years of freedom, if all that is expected of the youth of this country is to fall in line, sorry, your idea of nationalism is highly skewed. Let’s agree to disagree.
Bloated up notions of nationalism have long been used by conmen to mislead the naïve. The Sahara Group and its flamboyant founder Subrata Roy made a brand out of the tricolor. The company has gobbled up thousands of crores of investor money. The Supreme Court finally sent Subrata Roy to Tihar Jail in 2014. Hopefully, as he is also lodged in Tihar for now, Kanhaiya Kumar can learn a thing or two about patriotism from Subrata; understand how it is possible to fool an entire country simply with a saffron-tinged brand of business.
