Sedition as an offence was introduced to suppress the voices of those seeking freedom from colonial rule.
Those who 'excite or attempt to excite disaffection' towards the state are penalised under the Indian Penal Code. It is a tool used by the state to quash dissent by those opposing their policies.
Section 124-A of the IPC, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and other such repressive laws have no place in a democratic setup. Several activists have been arrested under and imprisoned merely because they made a film or enacted a play or published a pamphlet reflecting the state's conduct.
Sudhir Dhawale, a Dalit activist, writer and editor of a Marathi magazine Vidrohi,
was arrested in January 2011, and was booked for waging war against the
state under Section 121 of the IPC and charged with sedition (Section
124) and under the UAPA. As a writer, poet, playwright and editor,
Dhawale had brought the issues of injustice and atrocities against
Dalits into public domain.
According to the media watch website The Hoot, in 2011, surveillance and electronic interception of mail or other electronic communication, phone-tapping - including that of activists of the anti-nuclear agitation in Jaitapur - continued unabated. The arena for free speech battles may have temporarily shifted to the courtroom but freedom of expression — both virtual and otherwise — is at peril everywhere. In November 2011, the Bombay high court directed the state not to restrain activists from entering Ratnagiri district.
The district magistrate passed orders on the report of the superintendent of Ratnagiri stating that there was a possible law and order problem at the site and that activists were provoking villagers.
SK Sen, their advocate, argued that restrictions on freedom of speech and movement could not be imposed on such grounds and that the government was acting illegally and restraining them from going to Jaitapur for over a year.
The judges said the petitioners do not deserve to be restrained on the ground that in the past orders were passed under Section 144.
Mumbai-based Arun Ferreira, a civil rights activist, spent over four years in jail as the police believed that he was a Maoist. He was acquitted of all charges by the high court in 2011, but re-arrested outside Nagpur jail days later. He was charged for two more cases, again acquitted of one, and is currently out on bail for the other. Ferreira has filed a case against the state on his re-arrest.
A lawyer says the state wants to keep the activists busy by slapping one case after another, thereby deterring them from their activities of spreading awareness about issues.
Ferreira blogged, "Given the Centre's patronage, every state police department is eager to show the arrest of 'Naxals' by fabricating evidence, conjuring crimes of sedition and prolonging incarceration by re-arrests. Such strategies will enable the states to join the anti-Naxal bandwagon, resulting in a free flow of funds and assistance."
Seven people, including a post-graduate student and a member of the nomadic tribe who works for Kabir Kala Manch, a cultural organisation, were arrested by the Anti Terrorism Squad for being pro-Maoist under the UAPA.
The group has been charged from participating in seditious plays to burning a police station. The case is being heard at Sewri court.Source
Those who 'excite or attempt to excite disaffection' towards the state are penalised under the Indian Penal Code. It is a tool used by the state to quash dissent by those opposing their policies.
Section 124-A of the IPC, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and other such repressive laws have no place in a democratic setup. Several activists have been arrested under and imprisoned merely because they made a film or enacted a play or published a pamphlet reflecting the state's conduct.
Article continues below the advertisement...
According to the media watch website The Hoot, in 2011, surveillance and electronic interception of mail or other electronic communication, phone-tapping - including that of activists of the anti-nuclear agitation in Jaitapur - continued unabated. The arena for free speech battles may have temporarily shifted to the courtroom but freedom of expression — both virtual and otherwise — is at peril everywhere. In November 2011, the Bombay high court directed the state not to restrain activists from entering Ratnagiri district.
The district magistrate passed orders on the report of the superintendent of Ratnagiri stating that there was a possible law and order problem at the site and that activists were provoking villagers.
SK Sen, their advocate, argued that restrictions on freedom of speech and movement could not be imposed on such grounds and that the government was acting illegally and restraining them from going to Jaitapur for over a year.
The judges said the petitioners do not deserve to be restrained on the ground that in the past orders were passed under Section 144.
Mumbai-based Arun Ferreira, a civil rights activist, spent over four years in jail as the police believed that he was a Maoist. He was acquitted of all charges by the high court in 2011, but re-arrested outside Nagpur jail days later. He was charged for two more cases, again acquitted of one, and is currently out on bail for the other. Ferreira has filed a case against the state on his re-arrest.
A lawyer says the state wants to keep the activists busy by slapping one case after another, thereby deterring them from their activities of spreading awareness about issues.
Ferreira blogged, "Given the Centre's patronage, every state police department is eager to show the arrest of 'Naxals' by fabricating evidence, conjuring crimes of sedition and prolonging incarceration by re-arrests. Such strategies will enable the states to join the anti-Naxal bandwagon, resulting in a free flow of funds and assistance."
Seven people, including a post-graduate student and a member of the nomadic tribe who works for Kabir Kala Manch, a cultural organisation, were arrested by the Anti Terrorism Squad for being pro-Maoist under the UAPA.
The group has been charged from participating in seditious plays to burning a police station. The case is being heard at Sewri court.Source
No comments:
Post a Comment