While implementing the law in toto, we need to have a re-look at the sec 124A regarding sedition
Photo Credits: edit- main lead_1
The United States of America devised the Patriot Act in 2001 following 9/11. Its title is a ten-letter acronym (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.); “". This act gives relentless powers to the US probe agencies including the Homeland Security (which was also founded post 9/11) to conduct surveillance, probes and searches of individuals, groups or organizations suspected to be terrorists or connected with terror related activities.
Both, the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security were in response to the devastating terror attacks on the US soil by the terrorists promoted and propagated by the US foreign policy and funding a couple of decades ago before 9/11. Nonetheless, these legislations, how much ever draconian they may sound, were in response to “something”.
Now, let’s come to India.
Section 124A of the IPC defines sedition as: (i) 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, the government established by law; or (ii) whoever by the above means excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law, has committed the offence of sedition. The punishment: Imprisonment up to three years to life imprisonment, with fine or without it. The first explanation says that disaffection includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. Explanations 2 and 3 in effect say that disapprobation of the measures or administrative action etc. of the government to obtain their alteration by lawful means is not an offence.
(1897) was the first case wherein the law on sedition under Section 124A in the IPC was explained: “The offence consists in exciting or attempting to excite in others certain bad feelings towards the government. Whether any disturbance or outbreak was caused by these articles is absolutely immaterial.”
Point to be noted: IPC was enacted in 1860. But “sedition” was not part of the first Penal Code. It was introduced in 1870; 13 years after the first Mangal Pandey fame mutiny of 1857.
If USA-PATRIOT act was in response to the 9/11 isn’t it fair to safely assume that the provision of “Sedition” was included in the Indian Penal Code as a response to the revolt of 1857? Because the provision was mentioned in the original draft of 1837 of the IPC but the government of Her Highness did not include it in the Code of 1860 for reasons unknown. However, they felt an urgent need for its inclusion in 1870.
So that is history. In 2016, we arrested Kanhaiya Kumar for sedition based on a video which was doctored. We lodged him in police custody for more than eight days based on that tempered evidence. We generated the “anti national” debate based on the 7 videos (2 of them were manipulated) and sloganeering by few university students and trolled all those who questioned the present definition of “sedition” under IPC.
The point is – why are we so dubious about the concept of nationalism? We are unperturbed when a mainstream politician challenges the idea of India by making divisive, vitriolic, communal statements; we draw parallels between Dadri and Malda and debate “who is worse” rather than standing up against both the incidents condemning them as a “blot on humanity”; some of us are happy that Ishrat Jahan may have been a LeT terrorist and she was killed although in an alleged fake encounter; few of us are holding on to the “fake encounter” conveniently ignoring that she might have been a driving force behind one of LeT’s deadly sleeper cells. For some, pro-Afzal Guru Slogan constitutes “sedition”, but NDA desperately trying to forge an alliance with a pro-Afzal Guru political party is a “necessity”; for few, even anti India slogans mean “freedom of speech and expression”. For many, Nathuram Godse is still a , for some, he is a convicted
There is nothing wrong in “we the people” feeling either way. That exactly is the idea of India – a nation where you are free to believe what you feel is right. The problem arises when an elected government of the world’s largest republic decides to toe a line of the majority rhetoric.
A police force is not expected to arrest a university student based on unverified evidence and it is surely expected to arrest those who shouted anti-India slogans. But sadly, our police did the previous and failed to do the latter till the sloganeers decided to surrender at their time of choosing.
While implementing the law in toto, we need to have a re-look at the sec 124A regarding sedition. It is no longer the government of Her Highness. This is world’s largest democracy. Let’s be clear about one thing – we need the provision to try people for “seditious” activities. But we also need to redefine it. We need to upgrade our surveillance apparatus and intelligence gathering mechanisms to weed out traitors. Yes, we have traitors among us. There are forces working round the clock to destabilise India geographically, economically and internally. We cannot ignore this fact. But we also cannot hold on to a law which pronounces Bal Gangadhar Tilak as an enemy of the state.
Pramod Acharya is Editor, Prudent Media
