Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. (File Photo)
NEW DELHI: Senior BJP leader and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on Friday used the birth anniversary of Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee and took a jibe on the 2016 JNU agitation where anti-national slogans were raised.
Jaitley took to Facebook and criticised the Nehruvian era of politics under which to demand 'breakup' of the country without inciting violence can be taken as a legitimate free speech.
"In the past 70 years, this country has witnessed a change in the situation where Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru (country's first PM) amended the Constitution so that a demand for "Akhand Bharat" (United India) could incite a war and therefore should be prohibited. On the contrary, we all were told that to advocate a breakup of the country without inciting violence is legitimate free speech," Mr Jaitley wrote in a Facebook post.
In this context, he referred to the now infamous agitation in Jawaharlal Nehru University of 2016, wherein slogans like 'Bharat tere Tukde Honge' (India, you will be disintegrated)' slogan were raised.
"The court interpreted Article 124(A) of the IPC to mean that utterances would be punishable under section only if it intended to incite violence or had a reasonable tendency to create disorder or disturbance to public order by resorting to violence. A speech per se advocating disintegration would not be sedition unless the element of violence was apparent," he wrote.
In his article, Mr. Jaitley referred to the politico-constitutional conflict between Dr. Mookerjee, the founder of Bharatiya Jana Sangh, and the then Prime Minister Pt Jawaharlal Nehru.
He said Dr. Mookerjee, who was Industry Minister in the first Union Cabinet, resigned and took the strong public position against the "Nehru-Liaquat Pact".
He also spoke extensively in Parliament and outside advocating his philosophy in brief of "Akhand Bharat (United India)".
"Pt. Nehru over-reacted to Dr. Mookerjee's criticism. He interpreted the very idea of "Akhand Bharat" ie united India as an invitation to conflict since the country could not be reunited other than by war," wrote Mr Jaitley. Dr Mookerjee, on the contrary, claimed that Pakistan wanted a war and was already at war with us having captured a part of our legitimate territory of Jammu and Kashmir and, therefore, to suggest that his speeches on "Akhand Bharat" would lead to a war was not acceptable, wrote the Union Minister.
Mr. Jaitley pointed out at a series of subsequent political developments that the Constitution Amendment Bill was eventually passed that redefined 'sedition'.
"The Bill to amend the Constitution which, amongst others, contained the restriction relating to "friendly relations with foreign states" was introduced in Parliament," he wrote.
"But Pt Nehru was determined to go ahead. His principal response was if you criticize a Head of a State or a foreign State, that country may launch a war against us. This would adversely impact India's sovereignty. We cannot imperil the sovereignty of the whole nation in the name of some fancied freedom which puts an end to all freedoms."
Dr. Mookerjee argued that such worded amendment could prevent a debate on issues pending with Pakistan, not merely on the treatment of minorities or what was happening in Jammu and Kashmir, it would also prevent us from commenting on issues relating to evacuee property etc," Mr. Jaitley wrote.
"Was this (bringing the new changes) intolerance against Dr. Mookerjee and his philosophy which triggered this Constitution amendment?," wrote the BJP leader adding, however - "the answer is obvious."
"Panditji and Dr. Mookerjee were ideological opponents. Panditji had once commented that he would crush the Jan Sangh, Dr. Mookerjee had retorted that he would crush the crushing mentality. Their views on Jammu and Kashmir were diametrically opposite. History and subsequent developments have vindicated Dr. Mookerjee's position on Jammu and Kashmir," wrote Mr. Jaitley.
