The recent charging of few citizens with sedition only because they cheered for Pakistan has raised a the concerns about govt misusing sedition provision under SEC 124.Sedition is one of the few remnants left over from the British colonial legacy which were incorporated in the Constitution as a good part of Constitution is based on Government of India Act 1935. Sedition laws were actually used by the then British govt to silence the people raising demand for independence. In today's context where on one hand Constitution provides us Freedom of speech and expression under Art 19 1(a) of the Constitution presence of such law run against to the spirit of such freedom and hence should be deleted aa it has become an archaic law projecting British legacy. Although with growing extremism and continued radicalization of people by various agencies govt need to have a tool so as to take note of such activities. Further the decision of SC in Kedarnath v/s state of Bihar should be used as a proviso for the interpretation of such law and hence govt has specified sedition as provoking or inciting hatred or violence against elected govt.
Thus govt should be careful while charging any person with sedition laws and such charges should not be used regularly. Further govt should distinguish b/w freedom of speech and sedition and act accordingly to provide a sense of empowerment to citizens.
I think you are fairly in the right direction and just need to work upon structuring your answer little more and make it effective by giving more importance to facts and examples like aseem trivedi, kanhayia kumar and other such cases existing. it would be better if u could give some wordings of eminent personalities like gandhi or someone else like i have given it in the possible sample answer. U could see there for urself. another thing is that u know how to proceed with the answer like u mentioned abt few remnants remained from colonial legacy etc. but if u could substantiate ur answer with more facts like u could have included little about wahabism. i feel this would give an overall nice outlook to your answer. keep practising and improving.
i have a doubt , you have written--'in Kedarnath v/s state of Bihar should be used as a proviso for the interpretation of such law and hence govt has specified sedition as provoking or inciting hatred or violence against elected govt"
It is argued that along with the colonial laws like criminal defamation, laws on obscenity and blasphemy, the sedition law also runs against the ideal of Freedom of Expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution. Sedition in India is defined by the the section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code 1860. This was introduced by the British colonial government in 1870, when it felt the need to deal with the radical Wahabi movement led by syed Ahmed Barelvi.
Section 124-A of the IPC defines the term sedition in most wide and magnanimous way. It states that " 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 shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added. However, notably, the word and expression ‘Disaffection’ as found in the definition herein above, includes Disloyalty and All feelings of hate or enmity. However, the said definition of the offence of Sedition also clarifies that when a person comments strongly for disapproving the Government’s measures and policies with the intend to obtain their desired modifications in lawful ways and also without exciting hatred, contempt or disaffection, then such person cannot be said to have committed the said offence of Sedition.
However, the most important and very interesting fact behind the law of sedition is that, there can be seen many well- known freedom fighters, protesters, were also found booked under this provisions for this offence and for naming such, Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak are sufficient to know. Thus, considering such incidents when our great ideals were booked under such provision, it could be safely said that such provision would have been added to the Penal code by British peoples to stop Indians from protesting against them and their ruling. Even Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru saw this law as objectionable and obnoxious and also stated that such a law should have no place either for practical and historical reasons. He categorically mentioned this provision of punishment for sedition as fundamentally unconstitutional. One of the greatest criticism for the section 124-A of the IPC comes from none other than the most famous proponent of liberty and human rights that is mahatama gandhi himself. He viewed it as a measure designed to suppress the liberty of a citizen. He further added that Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by the law, If one has no affection towards other he/she must be given the full right to express his/her disaffection. The constitutional situation of the right to freedom of speech and expression is also very clear as it has been protected as the fundamental right in the indian constitution and hence safeguarding the liberty and freedom of the citizens. The stand of the courts also becomes evident from rulings in some of the famous cases in this regard.
The act faced judicial cut in this regard in the early days of independence itself when madras government in the Romesh Thapar case banned the left leaning magazine Crossroads for being over critical of the Nehru's government. The court held that banning a publication because it would entail a danger to the public order or safety was not supported by the constitutional scheme since the exceptions to the article 19(1)(a) were specific and had to entail a danger to the security of the state. This led the Nehru Government to amend the constitution to include phrases such as 'reasonable' restrictions, and 'Public order' etc in the article 19(2). as a safeguard against misuse by the government.
Several other cases as that of 1962 Kedarnath Singh versus state of bihar, in which the court held the section valid but added that this section should be viewed as to limit their application to acts involving intention or tendency to create disorder or disturbance of law and order and incitement to the state.
Even after such rulings by the courts, governments used the act to curb down the voices which are not in sync with the society. A peripheral glance at a few cases under which people have been booked under the sedition charges also points at this. To add to the list of JNU student Kanhaiya kumar and Cartoonist Aseem trivedi, 2011 recent reports of 15 people getting booked under the section 124-A of the IPC in the aftermath of india losing to pakistan in the champions trophy by the madhya pradesh government paints a not so pleasant image.
To conclude it can be fairly said that criticism against the government policies and decisions within a reasonable limit that does not incite people to rebel is consistent with the freedom of speech and expression. However if the provision of sedition used arbitrarily against the citizens in curbing down their voices, would definitely go against the sanctity of freedom of expression enshrined in the Article 19 of the constitution.
Section 124a of the Indian penal code, 1860 is the law governing sedition cases in India. It convicts a person of sedition if he by speech,writing or signs,visible or otherwise tries or succeeds inflaming hatred and rebellion against government established by law. Upon many instances this provision has been criticised as curtailing fundamental right of freedom,specifically freedom of speech. Recent cases of Kanhaiya Kumar, MP cricket case and cases against Gandhiji and Balgangadhar Tilak around a century ago have been much talked about in this context. Nehru, gandhi and many more leaders and scholars have criticised this provision, yet it exists. There is certain logical force behind it but it is not defined clear cut and has been practised in even more opaque manner.Though the Supreme Court has clarified that the sedition charge must be be levelled only when the expression of the persons incites violence or tries to do so. In present conditions,security,stability and orderly well being of Indian state and people, such laws are not totally irrelevant. Yet,to strengthen our democracy,to impart constitutional rights and benefits to the Indian public, such laws should be clearly defined.They must be applied transparently, objectively and rarely.
Section 124a of the Indian penal code, 1860 is the law governing sedition cases in India. It convicts a person of sedition if he by speech,writing or signs,visible or otherwise tries or succeeds inflaming hatred and rebellion against government established by law. Upon many instances this provision has been criticised as curtailing fundamental right of freedom,specifically freedom of speech. Recent cases of Kanhaiya Kumar, MP cricket case and cases against Gandhiji and Balgangadhar Tilak around a century ago have been much talked about in this context. Nehru, gandhi and many more leaders and scholars have criticised this provision, yet it exists. There is certain logical force behind it but it is not defined clear cut and has been practised in even more opaque manner.Though the Supreme Court has clarified that the sedition charge must be be levelled only when the expression of the persons incites violence or tries to do so. In present conditions,security,stability and orderly well being of Indian state and people, such laws are not totally irrelevant. Yet,to strengthen our democracy,to impart constitutional rights and benefits to the Indian public, such laws should be clearly defined.They must be applied transparently, objectively and rarely.
Firstly , the basic understanding of both the laws seperatly is required,
Sedition charges: IPC 124a
Which says whosoever, 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, 1 shall be punished.
Freedom is speech & expression : Art 19(a) It is the way by which one can put one's views and opinions about any issue in public by print, writing, visuals, films etc. Required for a healthy democracy, we being the largest democracy in the world and opting for parliamentary democracy it is the essential essence to propagate the freedom of speech & expression but there are some reasonable restrictions on this can be made by the state, on the grounds of sovereginity , integrity & security of this country.
Recently, on the name of freedom of expression various elements try to aggitate on various places and directly or indirectly challenging the integrity , security of this country, those else have been punished in future.
So, in a way Art 19(a) itself says that restrictions can be put and the sedition charge being the one way to take control over such issues.
whenever it is mentioned in the question to critically examine u must include both positive and negative aspects of the question though the word critically itself puts the question in a bit negative tone, but still thats what upsc demands according to me. So better have a conclusion which is not specific and is little more generic like the one in the answer of Mr. Raj. Else mere stating out the facts i think so doesnt make ur answer look like complete and better than others. Try to have some comprehensive view too. Thats my suggestion purely. Else u know the content bro just try to have a framework of answer. For reference look at Mr. Raj's answer.
The freedom of expressing dissent is also a freedom under Ar19 of the indian constitution , any dissent against the state or policies of the state ,state branding them as antinationals under sedition law has created much debate on sedition these days. according to section 124a of ipc 1860,any person creating hatred against the state is charged with sedition.it has been introduced by colonialsin india for controlling anti british ideas in that context it also charged Gandhi with sedition n arrested for his article in harijan criticizing british policies .. freedom under ar 19 already have exceptions in ar 19(2) in name of security of state,sovereignty n integrity of state etc hate speech is not right n and at same time it is appalling to continue with colonial law by the state without amendments suiting to our needs. so the way forward is unless and until the speech creates immediate violence ,it shouldnot be charged with sedition (as mentioned by sc in kedarnath vs state of bihar)
Where can one ask questions reagrding sources to rwad from besides answering the questions..when all the questions get posted..weekly??is there a syallbus to follow for the questions asked or just randomly any topic is asked??
Comment. "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters pain and pleasure, it is for them alone to point out what we ought to do and what we shall do" Bentham.
The recent charging of few citizens with sedition only because they cheered for Pakistan has raised a the concerns about govt misusing sedition provision under SEC 124.Sedition is one of the few remnants left over from the British colonial legacy which were incorporated in the Constitution as a good part of Constitution is based on Government of India Act 1935.
ReplyDeleteSedition laws were actually used by the then British govt to silence the people raising demand for independence.
In today's context where on one hand Constitution provides us Freedom of speech and expression under Art 19 1(a) of the Constitution presence of such law run against to the spirit of such freedom and hence should be deleted aa it has become an archaic law projecting British legacy.
Although with growing extremism and continued radicalization of people by various agencies govt need to have a tool so as to take note of such activities. Further the decision of SC in Kedarnath v/s state of Bihar should be used as a proviso for the interpretation of such law and hence govt has specified sedition as provoking or inciting hatred or violence against elected govt.
Thus govt should be careful while charging any person with sedition laws and such charges should not be used regularly. Further govt should distinguish b/w freedom of speech and sedition and act accordingly to provide a sense of empowerment to citizens.
I think you are fairly in the right direction and just need to work upon structuring your answer little more and make it effective by giving more importance to facts and examples like aseem trivedi, kanhayia kumar and other such cases existing. it would be better if u could give some wordings of eminent personalities like gandhi or someone else like i have given it in the possible sample answer. U could see there for urself. another thing is that u know how to proceed with the answer like u mentioned abt few remnants remained from colonial legacy etc. but if u could substantiate ur answer with more facts like u could have included little about wahabism. i feel this would give an overall nice outlook to your answer. keep practising and improving.
DeleteThnx bro.. appreciate ur review.. will work on it.
Deletei have a doubt , you have written--'in Kedarnath v/s state of Bihar should be used as a proviso for the interpretation of such law and hence govt has specified sedition as provoking or inciting hatred or violence against elected govt"
Deletehas the govt specified it or the SC??
Plzz review
ReplyDeleteIt is argued that along with the colonial laws like criminal defamation, laws on obscenity and blasphemy, the sedition law also runs against the ideal of Freedom of Expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution. Sedition in India is defined by the the section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code 1860. This was introduced by the British colonial government in 1870, when it felt the need to deal with the radical Wahabi movement led by syed Ahmed Barelvi.
ReplyDeleteSection 124-A of the IPC defines the term sedition in most wide and magnanimous way. It states that " 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 shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added.
However, notably, the word and expression ‘Disaffection’ as found in the definition herein above, includes Disloyalty and All feelings of hate or enmity.
However, the said definition of the offence of Sedition also clarifies that when a person comments strongly for disapproving the Government’s measures and policies with the intend to obtain their desired modifications in lawful ways and also without exciting hatred, contempt or disaffection, then such person cannot be said to have committed the said offence of Sedition.
However, the most important and very interesting fact behind the law of sedition is that, there can be seen many well- known freedom fighters, protesters, were also found booked under this provisions for this offence and for naming such, Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak are sufficient to know.
Thus, considering such incidents when our great ideals were booked under such provision, it could be safely said that such provision would have been added to the Penal code by British peoples to stop Indians from protesting against them and their ruling. Even Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru saw this law as objectionable and obnoxious and also stated that such a law should have no place either for practical and historical reasons. He categorically mentioned this provision of punishment for sedition as fundamentally unconstitutional.
One of the greatest criticism for the section 124-A of the IPC comes from none other than the most famous proponent of liberty and human rights that is mahatama gandhi himself. He viewed it as a measure designed to suppress the liberty of a citizen. He further added that Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by the law, If one has no affection towards other he/she must be given the full right to express his/her disaffection. The constitutional situation of the right to freedom of speech and expression is also very clear as it has been protected as the fundamental right in the indian constitution and hence safeguarding the liberty and freedom of the citizens. The stand of the courts also becomes evident from rulings in some of the famous cases in this regard.
The act faced judicial cut in this regard in the early days of independence itself when madras government in the Romesh Thapar case banned the left leaning magazine Crossroads for being over critical of the Nehru's government. The court held that banning a publication because it would entail a danger to the public order or safety was not supported by the constitutional scheme since the exceptions to the article 19(1)(a) were specific and had to entail a danger to the security of the state. This led the Nehru Government to amend the constitution to include phrases such as 'reasonable' restrictions, and 'Public order' etc in the article 19(2). as a safeguard against misuse by the government.
ReplyDeleteSeveral other cases as that of 1962 Kedarnath Singh versus state of bihar, in which the court held the section valid but added that this section should be viewed as to limit their application to acts involving intention or tendency to create disorder or disturbance of law and order and incitement to the state.
Even after such rulings by the courts, governments used the act to curb down the voices which are not in sync with the society. A peripheral glance at a few cases under which people have been booked under the sedition charges also points at this. To add to the list of JNU student Kanhaiya kumar and Cartoonist Aseem trivedi, 2011 recent reports of 15 people getting booked under the section 124-A of the IPC in the aftermath of india losing to pakistan in the champions trophy by the madhya pradesh government paints a not so pleasant image.
To conclude it can be fairly said that criticism against the government policies and decisions within a reasonable limit that does not incite people to rebel is consistent with the freedom of speech and expression. However if the provision of sedition used arbitrarily against the citizens in curbing down their voices, would definitely go against the sanctity of freedom of expression enshrined in the Article 19 of the constitution.
Section 124a of the Indian penal code, 1860 is the law governing sedition cases in India. It convicts a person of sedition if he by speech,writing or signs,visible or otherwise tries or succeeds inflaming hatred and rebellion against government established by law. Upon many instances this provision has been criticised as curtailing fundamental right of freedom,specifically freedom of speech. Recent cases of Kanhaiya Kumar, MP cricket case and cases against Gandhiji and Balgangadhar Tilak around a century ago have been much talked about in this context. Nehru, gandhi and many more leaders and scholars have criticised this provision, yet it exists. There is certain logical force behind it but it is not defined clear cut and has been practised in even more opaque manner.Though the Supreme Court has clarified that the sedition charge must be be levelled only when the expression of the persons incites violence or tries to do so.
ReplyDeleteIn present conditions,security,stability and orderly well being of Indian state and people, such laws are not totally irrelevant. Yet,to strengthen our democracy,to impart constitutional rights and benefits to the Indian public, such laws should be clearly defined.They must be applied transparently, objectively and rarely.
Section 124a of the Indian penal code, 1860 is the law governing sedition cases in India. It convicts a person of sedition if he by speech,writing or signs,visible or otherwise tries or succeeds inflaming hatred and rebellion against government established by law. Upon many instances this provision has been criticised as curtailing fundamental right of freedom,specifically freedom of speech. Recent cases of Kanhaiya Kumar, MP cricket case and cases against Gandhiji and Balgangadhar Tilak around a century ago have been much talked about in this context. Nehru, gandhi and many more leaders and scholars have criticised this provision, yet it exists. There is certain logical force behind it but it is not defined clear cut and has been practised in even more opaque manner.Though the Supreme Court has clarified that the sedition charge must be be levelled only when the expression of the persons incites violence or tries to do so.
ReplyDeleteIn present conditions,security,stability and orderly well being of Indian state and people, such laws are not totally irrelevant. Yet,to strengthen our democracy,to impart constitutional rights and benefits to the Indian public, such laws should be clearly defined.They must be applied transparently, objectively and rarely.
Well written bro.
Deletevery well written short and covers almost every aspect. Good job bro.
Deleteperfectly summed up
DeleteFirstly , the basic understanding of both the laws seperatly is required,
ReplyDeleteSedition charges: IPC 124a
Which says whosoever,
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, 1 shall be punished.
Freedom is speech & expression : Art 19(a)
It is the way by which one can put one's views and opinions about any issue in public by print, writing, visuals, films etc.
Required for a healthy democracy, we being the largest democracy in the world and opting for parliamentary democracy it is the essential essence to propagate the freedom of speech & expression but there are some reasonable restrictions on this can be made by the state, on the grounds of sovereginity , integrity & security of this country.
Recently, on the name of freedom of expression various elements try to aggitate on various places and directly or indirectly challenging the integrity , security of this country, those else have been punished in future.
So, in a way Art 19(a) itself says that restrictions can be put and the sedition charge being the one way to take control over such issues.
whenever it is mentioned in the question to critically examine u must include both positive and negative aspects of the question though the word critically itself puts the question in a bit negative tone, but still thats what upsc demands according to me. So better have a conclusion which is not specific and is little more generic like the one in the answer of Mr. Raj.
DeleteElse mere stating out the facts i think so doesnt make ur answer look like complete and better than others. Try to have some comprehensive view too. Thats my suggestion purely. Else u know the content bro just try to have a framework of answer. For reference look at Mr. Raj's answer.
The freedom of expressing dissent is also a freedom under Ar19 of the indian constitution , any dissent against the state or policies of the state ,state branding them as antinationals under sedition law has created much debate on sedition these days. according to section 124a of ipc 1860,any person creating hatred against the state is charged with sedition.it has been introduced by colonialsin india for controlling anti british ideas in that context it also charged Gandhi with sedition n arrested for his article in harijan criticizing british policies .. freedom under ar 19 already have exceptions in ar 19(2) in name of security of state,sovereignty n integrity of state etc hate speech is not right n and at same time it is appalling to continue with colonial law by the state without amendments suiting to our needs. so the way forward is unless and until the speech creates immediate violence ,it shouldnot be charged with sedition (as mentioned by sc in kedarnath vs state of bihar)
ReplyDeleteit is not for prelims?
ReplyDeletePlease review my answer
ReplyDeleteWhere can one ask questions reagrding sources to rwad from besides answering the questions..when all the questions get posted..weekly??is there a syallbus to follow for the questions asked or just randomly any topic is asked??
ReplyDelete