By Albert Thyrniang
“In Meghalaya too there were instances where the freedom of speech was attempted to be curtailed. The Supreme Court had to quash the FIR against the editor of this daily for her Facebook post that allegedly had communal content.”
Last Thursday the NIA court acquitted activist and Jorhat MLA Akhil Gogoi and three others in a sedition case and other charges, thereby setting the peasant leader free. Accused of instigating violence during the anti-CAA protests and of being a ‘Maoist’ the prominent anti-CAA face in Assam was charged under the ‘draconian’ Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, (UAPA). The MLA, the first Assamese to get elected to the Assembly while in jail and also the first to take oath while in custody, was cleared of all charges, hugely embarrassing the premier investigating agency.
Speaking to a national television Gogoi termed the NIA a ‘joke’ while accusing it of being a ‘recruiting’ agency for the BJP and the RSS. In March last also the then jailed leader ‘revealed’ that the NIA asked him to join RSS/BJP while insisting he takes home ₹20 crores as a precondition for bail. His refusal led to alleged physical and mental torture in custody. Gogoi’s revelations are dynamite.
Gogoi’s acquittal is a reiteration that NIA and the sedition law are misused against activists to quell protests and to quieten criticism against the government. Gogoi was arrested in December 2019 only as a “preventive measure” against the background of the deteriorating law and order situation in Assam arising out of the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). However, his case was handed over to the NIA which charged him with sedition.
Sedition has been used so liberally that the law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code has lost its sting. Many times the cases look ridiculous. Amulya Leona for example! The 19-year-old student-activist was arrested and booked for sedition in February 2020 for raising ‘Pakistan zindabad’ slogan on stage while protesting against CAA-NRC in Bengaluru. In July the same year the Manipur activist Erendro Leichombam was charged with sedition merely for posting on Facebook the picture of an acquiescent BJP Rajya Sabha MP and titular king of Manipur, Sanajaoba Leishemba’s meeting with Union Home Minister, Amit Shah with the caption “Minai macha” or “son of a servant” in Meitei. In February this year the 22-year-old climate change activist, Disha Ravi was arrested and charged with sedition for a ‘toolkit’ post supporting the farmer protests in Delhi. At the most the above actions can be termed as inappropriate but certainly do not amount to sedition. Many youths in Jammu and Kashmir are summarily arrested under the remnants of British colonialism.
Sedition cases flared up considerably with the advent of CAB/CAA. Random examples are cited. CAA protests led to 50, 3007 and 60 unnamed persons charged with sedition in FIRs in Mumbai, Jharkhand and Lucknow, respectively. Such was the eagerness of the authorities to brand everyone ‘anti-national’ thanks to the relic of the British era.
Akhil Gogoi’s acquittal is significant. While dismissing the cases against the government adversary, the judge expressed disappointment with the NIA saying much more was expected of the investigation agency. The cases are not even fit to enter the trial stage. It shows that the charges were all trumped up for political reasons, obviously with insufficient evidence. This will have a repercussion on the central government, state governments, the police and the law enforcing agencies. They will be less enthusiastic about charging political rivals and activists who are critical of government’s decisions and policies. In these challenging times the right of protests and the freedom of expression gets a fillip. With many beginning to be shattered, the faith in the judiciary is enhanced. The citizens of this great country can still count on the courts to preserve their well cherished fundamental rights. Laws can’t be used to intimidate and bring citizens into submission.
Elsewhere too the Indian courts have questioned the use of sedition laws. While granting bail to Disha Ravi the Delhi court had very strong words against the sedition law which it said cannot be invoked to “minister to wounded vanity of the government” while observing that that there was “not even an iota of evidence” against the green activist.
The wrong application of sedition is an intimidatory tactic. A lawyer even dares to state, “The state is terrorising young people by using the law and putting them behind bars” seeing the process itself as a punishment, rather than a trial or a conviction. Akhil Gogoi might have got justice but he had to spend 19 months in jail. Disha Ravi did secure bail but the young activist had to face the ignominy of being arrested. In June 2019 the Calcutta High Court acquitted three alleged Maoist activists but they had spent 14 years in prison after they were wrongly sentenced to life imprisonment on sedition charges by a trial court. Just when this piece was about to be mailed, news trickled in that Stan Swamy had passed away. The elderly and ailing Jesuit priest and a tribal activist has to be remembered as an undertrial prisoner jailed for sedition. Those at the helm of affairs know that even if a sedition accused would is declared innocent they would have been ‘punished’ for the ‘crime’ of raising their voices.
Way back in 1962 the Supreme Court ruled that sedition means “incitement to violence” or “overthrowing a democratically elected government through violent means.” The next year the Apex Court delivered, “Someone’s statement criticising the government does not invoke an offence of sedition or defamation.” Last week, taking note of the misuse of India’s sedition law, the Supreme Court observed, “Everything cannot be seditious” while promising to define “what is sedition and what is not.”
Criticism of and disagreeing with the government is not treason. That is why official data show that the conviction rate for sedition is negligible. While the number of cases has increased, conviction rates have dropped drastically. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), between 2016 and 2019 cases under Section 124A (sedition) of (IPC) increased by a massive 160% while the rate of conviction dropped to a meagre 3.3% in 2019 from 33.3% in 2016.
There is a strong case for abolition of the Sedition law. Violence can be dealt with by other available laws. Enacted in 1860 and introduced in India in 1870 by the British, the law was used to suppress national independence activists including Mahatma Gandhi himself who was found guilty and imprisoned. Post-Independence the law was almost dropped from the Constitution in 1948. India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru proposed to “get rid of it [Section 124A]” during the debate for the first Amendment of the Constitution in 1951 as the law was singled out in curbing free speech. It is another matter that his daughter, Indira Gandhi made sedition a cognizable offence for first time in 1973 when arrest without a warrant was legalised.
We boast of India as being the largest democracy in the world. How does democracy survive when free speech and expression is being stifled? How can we claim to be the number one democracy when dissent against government policies is seditious? How can we be so fragile that slogans like ‘Pakistan zindabad’ or ‘Azadi’ threaten this mighty nation? How can so many be charged with ‘waging war against the nation’ just because activists protest against the highly controversial CAA? Common sense does not betray when we say that some of the those charged with sedition like Simranjit Singh Mann, Binavak Sen, author Arundhati Roy, cartoonist Aseem Trivedi, climate activist Disha Ravi, Stan Swamy is unlikely to endanger the unity and integrity of this powerful country. It is surprising that the Modi government, some of whose ministers fought against Emergency of 1975-77, is so zealous in applying the British legacy law. We still hang on to the colonial era law while its originator, the UK abolished the out-dated act twelve years ago (2009) for primarily suppressing the voice of freedom.
In Meghalaya too there were instances where the freedom of speech was attempted to be curtailed. The Supreme Court had to quash the FIR against the editor of this daily for her Facebook post that allegedly had communal content. Surprisingly, even the Meghalaya High Court refused to stand up for free speech in that particular case. This paper was also ‘banned’ in West Khasi Hills by a pressure group that found a particular report not to its liking.
The Akhil Gogoi verdict may impact Meghalaya too. To add to the frustration of the West Bengal results Gogoi’s freedom might have upset the second in command in the NDA government. Developments in the neighbouring state may further delay the ILP resolution. The minister may now employ more procrastination tactics to avoid dealing with the ILP demand. The promises to return to the state capital will continue to be broken thus evading dealing with the question head on.
Given that the present government is pro-sedition, it is unlikely that Section 124A will be scrapped any time soon. However, the law should be used sparingly. Hope the Supreme Court soon defines sedition in clear terms leaving no room for any abuse or misuse.
Email: [email protected]
