At a time when free speech is already under increasing threat, the Law Commission’s recommendation to retain the colonial-era sedition law is a retrograde step, fraught with serious consequences. What is more disconcerting is that the commission has not only backed the draconian law but also suggested stricter punishments under Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code dealing with sedition. In its 88-page report, the law panel lists predictable reasons for retaining the law – as a reasonable restriction on free speech, and as a necessary legal instrument in the face of threats to India’s internal security. It cites Maoist extremism, militancy, secessionist movements and ethnic conflict in the Northeast.
This kind of formulation – pitting civil society against the nation – is problematic and raises several questions regarding the government’s commitment to fundamental democratic values. The law panel reasoned that the growth of social media has played a role in propagating radical thoughts against India, often instigated and facilitated by ‘adversarial foreign powers’. Ironically, the report comes nearly a year after the Supreme Court stayed the operation of the law and indicated that it would hear arguments in favour of striking down the colonial provision that has been misused by successive governments to curtail citizens’ freedom of expression. It is quite astonishing that the Law Commission dismisses apprehensions about the 130-year-old law going against the spirit of modern democracy with a counterargument that the entire framework of the Indian legal system is a colonial legacy. The report also suggested an increase in the minimum jail term for sedition offences from the present three years to seven years. This suggestion, if accepted, can be a huge blow to the democratic norms of the country. This should not be accepted by the government of India.