Article 19 commends India’s top court ruling to hold colonial-era sedition law
Article 19, a UK based international human rights organisation, commends Indian Supreme Court order to hold controversial colonial-era sedition law (section 124A of the Indian Penal Code) until the government completes its review of the sedition provision, said a statement on Sunday.
The court made the order while hearing a petition filed in the court challenging the constitutionality of the provision. The central government of India acknowledged in the court that the law is not in tune with the current times and promised to review the provision.
Faruq Faisel, regional director for Article 19 South Asia, said, “India’s sedition law has been increasingly used by the recent Indian administration to suppress dissent, along with the criminal defamation law, and laws dealing with hate speech. Indian Supreme Court ruling would act as a strong message against the rampant misuse of the sedition law by the Indian government to silence dissent and infringe personal liberty.”
“In 19th century and early 20th century, British colonial government extensively used sedition law against Indian political leaders and freedom fighters seeking independence from British colonial government. The provision has now been weaponised as a tool of suppression by the successive governments of independent India.”
Bangladesh also inherited the same law. Like Indian government, Bangladesh government should review the colonial sedition law provided under section 124A of the Penal Code, 1860 and repeal the provision accordingly, Faruq Faisel added.
Indian government has been accused of using the section 124A of the antiquated Indian Penal Code - against students, journalists, intellectuals, social activists, and those critical of the government to essentially suppress dissent and free speech.
The Supreme Court of India ordered the Indian central government and states government to refrain from registering any new cases and hold all pending trials, appeals, and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with the offence of sedition, till the central government completes the promised exercise to reconsider and re-examine the provision.
The government initially defended the provision arguing that “isolated incidents of misuse” do not necessitate removal of the provision itself; it has now told the court that it is mulling a fresh review of the colonial law.
It is clear that the Union of India agrees with the primary opinion expressed by this court that the rigours of Section 124A of the IPC is not in tune with the current social context, and was intended for a time when this country was under the colonial regime.
Article 19 calls on Indian government to repeal the sedition provision completely and withdraw all cases filed under the sedition law.
It also urges Indian government to review such other laws i.e. the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967; the National Security Act, 1980; the Public Safety Act, 1978 and the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, which have been used to suppress dissent and personal liberty for necessary amendment.