The Indian State must scrap the sedition law

A mature, liberal democracy cannot fight its own citizens

Nearly three years ago, a crowd in Jawaharlal Nehru University was heard protesting the “judicial killing of Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhatt”— two terrorists executed upon being handed the death sentence after full hearing by the courts of law. The chants in support of terrorists and against the State were condemnable but the question for the authorities was: How should a liberal democracy react to such events? Unfortunately, India decided to unleash the repressive might of the State against the accused. On Monday, the Delhi police filed a charge sheet, slapping sedition, among other charges, on 10 protesters, including three student activists — Kanhaiya Kumar, Umar Khalid and Anirban Bhattacharya.

The use of a colonial-era sedition law on citizens of the republic is disconcerting. Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code was an instrument used by the colonial administration to repress the freedom movement. Recognising the potential for its misuse, the Supreme Court in 1962 had restricted its usage to cases in which there was a clear incitement to violence. However, police continue to use this law to arrest hapless citizens.

Clearly, the dilution has not deterred the administration and police from arresting citizens. This law needs to go. A mature, liberal democracy cannot fight its own citizens. If there is a bona fide conspiracy against the State, there are enough laws in the statute book to look into them. In 1989, a landmark case, Texas v Johnson, was decided by the US Supreme Court. The court ruled that Gregory Lee Johnson’s act of burning the US flag was protected under freedom of speech. Most notably, Justice Anthony Kennedy said: “It is poignant but fundamental that the flag protects those who hold it in contempt.” It is high time the Indian police, judiciary and legislature learnt from Justice Kennedy.