An anachronistic law

The police in Bengaluru have registered an FIR, under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code, against Amnesty International India, highlighting once again the anachronism of the sedition law and its potential as a tool for harassment. Amnesty India had organised a function as part of its campaign to seek justice for "victims of human rights violations" in Jammu and Kashmir, an event that ended in heated arguments and pro-azadi sloganeering. The FIR was lodged on the basis of a complaint by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, a student body affiliated to the RSS. Although the Karnataka Home Minister has clarified that the police would proceed against the rights group only if "evidence is found to substantiate the claims made", the incident draws attention to the danger in retaining a law that should have no place in our statute books, one that Jawaharal Nehru himself had described as "highly objectionable and obnoxious", back in 1951. Although the courts have repeatedly held that the operation of Section 124-A is limited to cases where what is spoken incites violence and public disorder, the limitations of the section have rarely stopped prosecuting authorities from using it as a tool to stifle dissent and criticism.

Unfortunately, a focus on the use of the sedition law by both public intellectuals and the media has been largely limited to high-profile cases such as those involving JNU student leader Kanhaiya Kumar (for supposedly raising anti-national slogans), Tamil folk singer Kovan (for criticising the government's liquor policy), Hardik Patel (for rallying Patidars to demand reservation) and Aseem Trivedi (for anti-corruption cartoons). But it is important to also keep sight of the countless cases that do not receive individual attention and which expose the full extent of the misapplication of the sedition law. Most sedition cases do not result in trials, leave alone convictions, but it is a sobering thought that as many as 58 people were arrested in 2014 under Article 124-A -- a vague and dangerously inexact provision that punishes those who by use of words, signs or visible representation "bring into hatred or contempt" or "excite disaffection" towards the government. That people continue to get charged with an offence added to the IPC a decade after its promulgation in 1860, to help a colonial government hold sway over its subjects, is a matter of shame. India failed to scrap the law in the first few years after Independence, after which it was upheld, albeit with caveats, by the Supreme Court in Kedarnath Singh v. State of Bihar in 1962. In the intervening years, countries including Britain have abolished their sedition laws. It's time India joined their ranks.

Penal Prison/punishment
Amnesty (freedom from being punished)
anachronism out-of-place thing (time-wise)
sedition anti-government crime
potential as possible ability to be/possible ability as
harassment (teasing and threatening over and over again in a mean way)
campaign (series of actions to reach a goal)
seek look (for)
sloganeer (person who makes up sayings)
Parish (area controlled by a church)
affiliated connected
clarified cleared up
proceed go ahead/move forward
evidence (event(s) or object(s) that prove something)
substantiate prove
incident event
retaining keeping/holding
statute law
objectionable disgusting/obnoxious
obnoxious (rude, insulting, and offensive)
repeatedly over and over again
incites starts (trouble)
disorder sickness/problem
limitations limits
prosecuting authorities people (who are charging someone with a crime)
stifle stop
dissent disagreement
intellectuals smart people
the media newspapers, web sites, and TV
largely mostly
high-profile important/famous
supposedly (probably)
slogans sayings
folk singer (artist who sings well-loved songs)
corruption (dishonest actions that ruin your trust)
countless huge numbers of
convictions (judgments of guilt in court)
sobering upsetting
vague unclear
inexact (not very accurate or clear)
contempt hatred
disaffection unhappiness
a decade ten years
promulgation announcing and teaching
hold sway are in control
failed to did not
upheld supported/judged as correct
albeit although
caveats notes of caution
intervening (in-between/helping)
abolished permanently stopped
their ranks their group