Amend the relevant law, but do not abolish it
Every now and then, when someone or the other is booked under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code that deals with sedition, demands arise in favour of the law's abolition. The primary explanation is that the Section is being misused, and the reason why this is so is because the provisions of the law are vague enough to be misinterpreted and used to harass dissenting citizens. Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju admitted in the Rajya Sabha that the law indeed was “very wide” and can be reviewed. He also added that the law Commission of India was studying the matter and would submit its finding to the Government soon.
There is indeed a need for review to eliminate legal confusion, but the demand for scrapping the anti-sedition law must be dismissed outright. The Union Government must not succumb to pressure from various lobbies — human rights activists and assorted elements within and outside the political system — who would like nothing more than the absence of a strong law to counter anti-national activities that pass muster in the name of freedom of expression the Constitution of India guarantees. As recent and past developments have shown, anti-India elements are sprouting and flourishing in various parts of the country, and their offence cannot be effectively handled without specialised laws in place. Their indulgence is not of the kind that can be termed as a routine ordinary law and order issue. It must be kept in mind that this country has special anti-terror laws, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Earlier, there was the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, and also the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
At various stages, they were extremely useful in tackling the menace of terrorism (homegrown and those from outside the country). It would be foolish to do away with the anti-sedition provisions merely because the British had conceived and placed them in the IPC to punish the country's freedom-fighters. A vast part of the Indian Penal Code is of British origin, but that is no reason to scrap it. Improvements through amendments, keeping in view the changed situation, are certainly necessary and must be done at the earliest. Similarly, misuse of the law cannot be made an excuse for throwing the baby with the bath-water. laws have been subjected to misuse, but they cannot be terminated. The position by certain sections of society, including politicians, NGOs and the intelligentsia, that anti-sedition laws have no place in a democracy, is naïve. No robust democracy will tolerate ‘break nation to pieces' slogans; every such country must have dedicated laws to deal with the misuse of democratic rights.
It is for the legal fraternity such as the apex court, the law Commission of India and eminent jurists to deliberate upon the best way to streamline Section 124A and remove the anomalies. Interestingly, many legal minds that are seeking a review of or demanding an end to the law, had in the past opined that the Section was clear on what constitutes ‘sedition'. This they had done to differentiate between offensive speech and a seditionist one. The Congress, which has been loud in its objection, too had used the provisions of Section 124A when in Government, and didn’t do anything to revamp the law.