22ND LAW COMMISSION ON SEDITION LAW

1. Context

2. What exactly has the Commission said?

• The 88-page report by the present or the 22nd Law Commission of India, headed by former Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi stated that the commission had received a reference from the Ministry of Home Affairs in March 2016, for a study of the usage of the sedition law and suggest amendments, if any.
• The Commission, however, took up this reference in November 2022, a few months after the Supreme Court bench, headed by then Chief Justice of India N V Ramana, stayed the penal provision in May 2022.
• By ruling that “it will be appropriate not to continue” with the offense of sedition till the government reviewed the provision, the Supreme Court while testing the constitutionality of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code had raised the bar for the government to invoke the provision.
• Although the court did not explicitly stay the provision-no criminal law in force has never been stayed by the court and it virtually stalled the operation of the provision.

3. What is Sedition Law?

• Sedition was incorporated into the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 1870. It is defined as any action that brings or attempts to bring contempt or hatred toward the government of India.
• Sedition cases are punishable with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. It categorizes four sources of seditious acts-spoken words, written words, signs, and visible representations.
• It is classified as 'cognizable' (No need of a Court warrant to arrest the person ) and a 'non-bailable' and 'non-compoundable' offense.

4. What has been the history of sedition Law in India?

• Sedition laws were first enacted in 17th-century England. Later it was inserted into IPC in 1870.
• The section was introduced initially to deal with increasing Wahabi activities between 1863 and 1870. These activities posed a challenge to the colonial government.
• Some of the most famous sedition trials of the 19th and early 20th centuries involved Indian nationalist leaders.
• The first among them was the trial of Jogendra Chandra Bose in 1891. He was the editor of the newspaper, Bangabasi.
• He wrote an article criticizing the Age of Consent Bill for posing a threat to the religion and for its coercive relationship with Indians.
• It was also used to prosecute Bal Gangadhar Tilak (for his writings in Kesari) in 1897. The other well-known case was the sedition trial of Mahatma Gandhi in 1922.
• Gandhi had called sedition 'the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.

5. Law commissions recommendations on Sedition

• The Commission recommended three changes to the law on sedition. These are
• First, the report asked to include the ratio of the Kedar Nath ruling into the provision by adding the words "with a tendency to incite violence or cause public disorder." The report also defines the tendency to incite violence.
• Second, the report suggests enhancing the imprisonment for sedition to "remove an oddity.'' One of the criticisms against the provision is that it leaves judges with wide discretion on sentencing.
• Section 124A has a jail term of up to three years or life imprisonment. This means that the judges either held imprisonment for life or held imprisonment for up to three years only, but nothing in between.
• The Law Commission has now proposed enhancing the jail term to up to seven years of life imprisonment.
• The 42nd Law Commission report, in 1971, recommended that the minimum punishment be only five.
• Third, to prevent misuse of the law, the report suggested including procedural safeguards.

6. What are the reasons given by the committee to retain the sedition law?

• To safeguard the unity and integrity of India: The report cited threats to India's internal security, including Maoist extremism, militancy and ethnic conflict in the northeast, terrorism in Jammu Kashmir, and other secessional activities. These necessitate retaining the law on sedition.
• Reasonable restriction: The commission justified criminalizing sedition as it is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) of the Constitution (which deals with restrictions on the right to freedom of speech, assembly, etc. under Article 19(1).
• Realities differ in every jurisdiction: Britain and many other colonial countries outlawed Sedition but that does not mean India should outlaw it too. This is because a) the courts of competent jurisdictions like the US, the UK, etc. had their own history, geography, population, diversity, laws, etc which are not compatible with Indian circumstances and b) they have merged their sedition law with counter-terror legislation.
• Existence of counter-terror legislation: One of the arguments made in favor of repealing the law on sedition is that there are several counter-terror legislations that could adequately take care of threats against the state. Where anti-terror legislation can be invoked for acts that threaten national security, sedition is frequently invoked to punish political speech or actions. However, the Law Commission simply states that the existence of anti-terror legislation does not by“implication cover all elements of the offense and envisaged under Section 124A of IPC.” 
• Sedition being a colonial legacy: The Commission also refuted the argument that the sedition law must be repealed since it is an arcane law that has an imprint of colonial legacy and is a law that was used by the British against Indian freedom fighters. Last year, the Supreme Court also made the observation that the provision may be outdated for a democratic republic.

Previous year Questions