Right To Criticise The Govt Is A Fundamental Right And Not A Seditious Act:

Dissent and Democracy

The Preamble to the Constitution of India;

WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;

and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;

IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION

The Preamble to the Constitution of India outlines the ideals that must guide Indian democracy. Together with the Directive Principles of State Policy, it provides the context in which the country can achieve the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Part III of the Constitution.

The Preamble to the Constitution promises liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship.

The Article 19 (1) of Indian constitution provides 6 fundamental rights in the nature of freedoms which are specifically summarized with sub-clauses of Article 19 (1) as under

(a) Freedom of speech and expression;

(b) Assemble peaceably and without arms;

(c) Form associations or unions;

(d) Move freely throughout the territory of India;

(e) Reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and

(f) Practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

The article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India states that, “all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression”.

These three freedoms are instruments through which dissent can be expressed. The right of freedom of opinion and the right of freedom of conscience by themselves include the extremely important right to disagree. The right to disagree, the right to dissent and the right to take another point of view would inhere inherently in each and every citizen of the country.

The exercise of this right is, however, subject to “reasonable restrictions” for certain purposes being imposed under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India.

Importance of dissent

Democracy is the government for the people, of the people and by the people. Freedom of expression is the fourth pillar of democracy. This right of expression gives its citizens a right to criticise and ask the Government to function properly. If a country has to grow in a holistic manner where not only the economic rights but also the civil rights of the citizen are to be protected, dissent and disagreement have to be permitted, and in fact, should be encouraged.

Hence there can be no democracy without dissent. The very essence of democracy is that every citizen has a right to participate not only in the electoral process but also in the way in which our country is run. This right becomes meaningless if that person cannot criticize the actions of the government. The citizen, is not only a participant in the democratic process, he is an integral part of the country and has a right express his views even if they be totally contrary to the views of those in power.

Criticism cannot be a ground for penal action

No sedition case can be filed unless the spirit of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code is prime facie met,

Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code defines sedition as 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 and provides for punishment to the offender with an imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.

The history of Sedition laws in India can be traced back to the Indian Penal Code enacted in 1860 under the British Raj. It was added as an amendment to the Act in 1870. The British used this law to suppress the Wahabi Movement and imprison activists like Lokmanya Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.

In 1961, the Punjab High Court held that sedition violated the freedom of speech guaranteed in Article 19, and declared it unconstitutional. Allahabad High Court proceeded to do the same, and the matter moved to the Supreme Court. Ultimately, in the case of Kedar Nath v. State of Bihar, the apex court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 124A.

In Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), the Supreme Court held that mere criticism of the government is not sedition unless it is an incitement to violence or breach of public order. Hence, the apex court upheld the constitutional validity of the sedition law. It was held that unless accompanied by an incitement or call for violence, criticism of the government cannot be labelled as sedition.

Should the Indian legal system abolish the sedition law?

In today’s scenario, the sedition law expects that citizens should not show enmity, contempt towards the Government established by the law.

• There are some dark areas which lies between actual law and its implementation.
• Thus the laws need to amend those dark areas.
• In India, there are so many divisive powers acting together in which such laws are necessary evils.
• It is the need for such law that those activities which are promoting violence and public disorder should be stopped.