Central Idea

• In a recent development, the Lahore High Court in Pakistan annulled the offence of sedition in their penal code, raising questions about India’s similar provision under Section 124A. While a challenge to this law is pending before the Indian Supreme Court, the underlying logic of sedition persists and has found its way into various provisions that criminalize speech.

What is Sedition?

• The Section 124A defines sedition as, an offence committed when any person 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.
• Disaffection includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. However, comments without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, will not constitute an offense.
• Sedition is a non-bailable offense. Punishment under Section 124A ranges from imprisonment up to three years to a life term with/without a fine.
• Sedition was made a cognizable offense for the first time in history in India during the tenure of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1973, that is, arrest without a warrant was now permissible.

How the offensive speech reinforces existing social hierarchies and inequality?

• Reinforcing Dominant Narratives: Offensive speech often aligns with the dominant narratives propagated by those in power. It reinforces and upholds the existing social order by validating and amplifying the perspectives and ideologies of the privileged groups.
• Perpetuating Stereotypes and Prejudices: Offensive speech often relies on stereotypes and prejudices that are deeply rooted in social hierarchies. By perpetuating these stereotypes, offensive speech reinforces the existing inequalities and discriminates against individuals based on their identities, such as caste, race, gender, religion, or socioeconomic status.
• Suppressing Dissent and Alternative Voices: Offensive speech can be used as a tool to suppress dissent and alternative viewpoints. It creates an environment of fear and intimidation, discouraging individuals from challenging the status quo or speaking out against injustice.
• Creating Emotional and Psychological Harm: Offensive speech reinforces negative self-perceptions, perpetuates feelings of inferiority, and reinforces internalized oppression. This can lead to a lack of confidence, self-censorship, and a reluctance to participate in public discourse, further perpetuating existing social hierarchies.
• Unequal Consequences and Legal Frameworks: Offensive speech often faces unequal consequences based on the social position of the speaker and the target. Marginalized individuals are more likely to face severe repercussions for their speech, while privileged individuals often enjoy greater impunity.

How entrenched Hierarchies manifest in the law in India?

• Caste-Based Discrimination: The deeply rooted caste system in India influences the legal framework. Despite constitutional safeguards and affirmative action policies, lower-caste individuals continue to face discrimination and marginalization.
• Unequal Access to Justice: Marginalized communities, including lower castes, tribal communities, and economically disadvantaged groups, often encounter barriers in accessing justice. Limited legal awareness, inadequate legal aid services, and bias within the judiciary can result in unequal access to justice.
• Discriminatory Laws and Practices: Personal laws based on religious or customary practices can reinforce gender inequality and restrict the rights of women. Similarly, laws related to land ownership, inheritance, and labor rights may disproportionately affect marginalized communities, reinforcing existing social disparities.
• Limited Representation and Diversity: The underrepresentation of individuals from lower castes, tribal backgrounds, and other marginalized groups in positions of power within the legal system can lead to biases and insensitivity towards their concerns and needs. This lack of diversity can perpetuate hierarchical power structures and hinder efforts to address social inequalities.
• Selective Enforcement and Impunity: The enforcement of laws in India can be selective, leading to unequal treatment based on social, economic, or political factors. Marginalized communities may experience higher rates of arrests, police brutality, and arbitrary detention. Meanwhile, individuals with social and economic power may enjoy impunity for their actions, perpetuating social hierarchies within the legal system.

Facts for prelims

Evolving nature of the interpretation and application of sedition laws

• Striking Down Sedition Laws: In recent years, there have been calls to strike down or reform sedition laws, questioning their compatibility with democratic principles and the right to free expression. The Lahore High Court’s decision to annul the offence of sedition in Pakistan’s penal code exemplifies this growing debate.
• Constitutional Challenges: The Supreme Court of India has examined the validity and scope of Section 124A in several cases. While the law may remain in abeyance without being formally struck down, these constitutional challenges create an opportunity to redefine the boundaries of sedition and ensure its alignment with constitutional principles.
• Expansion of Speech Offenses: The logic of sedition has extended beyond the specific offense itself and transplanted into other provisions of law that criminalize speech. In the Indian context, laws that criminalize hurting religious sentiments or sentiments of particular communities share similarities with sedition.
• Chilling Effect on Freedom of Speech: The fear of prosecution and the potential consequences, such as arrests, imprisonment, or social repercussions, may lead individuals to self-censor or refrain from expressing dissenting opinions.
• Judicial Pronouncements: Judicial pronouncements play a crucial role in shaping the mutating logic of sedition. Courts have an opportunity to interpret and apply sedition laws in a manner that upholds freedom of speech, safeguards democratic values, and ensures a reasonable balance between the state’s legitimate interests and citizens fundamental rights.
• For example: Recent judgment such as the Media One case have emphasized the importance of protecting freedom of speech, criticizing the misuse of sedition for curbing dissent and censoring speech.

Way forward

• Narrowing the Definition of Sedition: Refining and narrowing the definition of sedition can help prevent its misuse. The focus should be on acts or speech that directly incite violence or pose a genuine threat to the territorial integrity or sovereignty of the country. This would help avoid undue restrictions on dissent and criticism of the government.
• Safeguarding Freedom of Speech: It is crucial to ensure that the sedition law is not misused as a tool to suppress legitimate criticism, dissent, or peaceful protests. Safeguards should be put in place to protect individuals’ right to free speech and expression, while allowing for robust public debate and the peaceful expression of dissenting opinions.
• Transparency and Accountability: Establish mechanisms to promote transparency and accountability in the application of sedition laws. This includes clear guidelines for law enforcement agencies, regular review of cases, and strict consequences for misuse of the law. Proper oversight and monitoring can help prevent arbitrary arrests and protect individuals from wrongful prosecution.
• Public Awareness and Legal Education: Promote public awareness and legal education about the scope and limitations of the sedition law. This can help individuals understand their rights and responsibilities, empowering them to exercise their freedom of speech responsibly while avoiding unlawful acts.
• Focus on Alternative Measures: Emphasize the use of alternative legal measures, such as laws related to defamation, incitement to violence, or hate speech, to address genuine threats to public order or national security. These laws should be effectively enforced to protect individuals without infringing upon their fundamental rights.

Conclusion

• Beyond the formal striking down of Section 124A, it is essential to address the underlying logic of sedition and its influence on various provisions that curtail freedom of speech. Recognizing the entangled relationship between law and society, and the hierarchical power dynamics that shape the prosecution of speech offenses, is paramount in safeguarding democratic values and upholding freedom of expression.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your personal mentor for UPSC 2024 | Schedule your FREE session and get the Prelims prep Toolkit!

Also read:

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now