Law Commission calls for re-think on sedition clause

Asks if contempt of court invites punishment, what about contempt of govt.

Updated - August 31, 2018 01:04 am IST

Published - August 30, 2018 09:53 pm IST - NEW DELHI

The over 300 years old statue of justice (Justitia) at the Römer in Frankfurt am Main.

The over 300 years old statue of justice (Justitia) at the Römer in Frankfurt am Main.

Dissent and criticism of the government are essential ingredients of a robust public debate in a vibrant democracy, the Law Commission of India said on Thursday.

The Commission, which is the Centre’s topmost advisory body on laws, headed by former Supreme Court judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan, published a consultation paper recommending that it is time to re-think or even repeal the provision of sedition (Section 124A) from the Indian Penal Code.

Right to free speech

The Commission has invited public opinion on the prospect of either redefining or doing away with Section 124A in the “largest democracy of the world, considering that right to free speech and expression is an essential ingredient of democracy.” Why should India retain sedition when the British, who introduced sedition to oppress Indians, have themselves abolished the law in their country, the Commission asked. Sedition attracts imprisonment from three years to life.

The Commission said an “expression of frustration over the state of affairs cannot be treated as sedition.”

Safety valve

The consultation paper was published a day after the Supreme Court lashed out at the government, saying “dissent is the safety valve of democracy,” while hearing a petition challenging the pan-India crackdown and arrests of five activists.

“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… 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. While it is essential to protect national integrity, it should not be misused as a tool to curb free speech,” the Commission said in its consultation paper.


“In a democracy, singing from the same songbook is not a benchmark of patriotism. People should be at liberty to show their affection towards their country in their own way,” the Commission said.

It said “every restriction on free speech and expression must be carefully scrutinised to avoid unwarranted restrictions.”

But the Commission has also posed the query that if contempt of court invites penal action, should “contempt of government” also attract punishment. The Commission asks whether it would be “worthwhile” to rename Section 124A and find a “suitable substitute” for the term ‘sedition’.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.