0 Comment(s) *
* The moderation of comments is automated and not cleared manually by indianexpress.com.
The Centre which had initially defended the law, changed its stand, told the Court that the provision will be reviewed and sought more time. The Supreme Court’s interim order on Wednesday, effectively putting on hold Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code that defines and penalises sedition, is a very welcome intervention. This provision has been on the statute books for over 130 years, pre-dates the Constitution and has been invoked more in its misuse. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana has crucially moved the needle in the right direction on the controversial law with its “prima facie view that the rigor of Section 124A of IPC is not in tune with the current social milieu, and was intended for a time when this country was under the colonial regime.” Significantly, the Centre which had initially defended the law, changed its stand, told the Court that the provision will be reviewed and sought more time. The Court has taken on board this change in the government’s position to put the provision in abeyance till the review process is complete.
While the final decision on the issue is yet to come, whether through the court’s final ruling or the process of Parliament, the SC has decidedly put the onus on the government to prevent the misuse of the law. The Court has adopted a conservative but practical approach by ordering a formal pause of all pending proceedings involving the sedition law even as it has raised the bar for registration of fresh cases. Underlining the concerns of rampant wrongful use of the provision, which even the Attorney General for India KK Venugopal raised, the bench said it “expect(s)” that till the re-examination is complete, “it will be appropriate not to continue the usage of the aforesaid provision of law by the governments.” It would “hope and expect” that the state and central governments will restrain from registering any FIR, continuing any investigation or taking any coercive measures by invoking Section 124A of IPC while the aforesaid provision of law is under consideration, the court said. And that it was doing so while remaining “cognisant of security interests and integrity of the State on one hand, and the civil liberties of citizens on the other hand”.
Having made a strong pitch for reviewing the law on its own, the Centre must now prioritise the issue. Union Minister for Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju’s comments in the immediate aftermath of the interim order, on a “laxman rekha” between the judiciary and the executive, and the government’s imperative to respect not just the Constitution but also other laws, signal a discomfort with the Court’s directives. This is perhaps the first time that a criminal law has been put on hold, and effectively stayed, pending a test of constitutionality. The Court’s calibrated approach applies much-needed pressure on the government to ensure that its final decision is time-bound and not a means to stall a more comprehensive reckoning with the law. On sedition, the government attempted to mount the high ground, invoking the occasion of the 75th year of the independence and the Prime Minister’s intent. The court has now put it to the test.
This editorial first appeared in the print edition on May 12, 2022 under the title ‘A hopeful pause’.
Best of Express Premium
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
© The Indian Express (P) Ltd