INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
aspect of it cannot be treated as "sedition" and the charge can only be invoked in cases where the intention is to overthrow the government
with violence and illegal means, the Law Commission observed today in a consultation paper on the subject.The Commission also noted that in
order to study revision of section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that deals with sedition, it should be taken into consideration that
an example of using such "draconian" laws, it observed.The consultation paper also toyed with the idea of redefining sedition in a country
like India, the largest democracy in the world, considering that right to free speech and expression was an essential ingredient of
democracy that has been ensured as a fundamental right by the Constitution."Berating the country or a particular aspect of it, cannot and
should not be treated as sedition
If the country is not open to positive criticism, there lies little difference between the pre- and post-independence eras
Right to criticise one's own history and the right to offend are rights protected under free speech," the consultation paper said.For merely
expressing a thought that is not in consonance with the policy of the government of the day, a person should not be charged under the
section, the paper said."Sedition charges can only be invoked where the intention behind any act is to overthrow the government with
violence and illegal means," it observed.The paper also cited examples of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Kanhaiya Kumar,
who was charged with sedition over the alleged anti-India slogans on the campus.It added that while it was essential to protect national
integrity, it should not be misused as a tool to curb free speech.Dissent and criticism are essential ingredients of a robust public debate
on policy issues as part of a vibrant democracy, it observed, and therefore, every restriction on free speech and expression must be
carefully scrutinised to avoid unwarranted restrictions.The Commission also hoped that a healthy debate takes place in the country among the
legal luminaries, lawmakers, government and non-government agencies, academia, students and the general public on the topic, so that a
public friendly amendment could be brought about.
