ColumnsSedition :(Chequered History & Present Status) Pavan Narang25 Jun 2020 9:35 PMShare This – x Black’s Law Dictionary defines sedition as”An agreement, communication, or other preliminary activity aimed at inciting treason or some lesser commotion against public authority” – “The line dividing preaching disaffection towards the Government and legitimate political activity in a democratic set-up cannot be neatly drawn. Where legitimate political criticism of…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?Login Black’s Law Dictionary defines sedition as”An agreement, communication, or other preliminary activity aimed at inciting treason or some lesser commotion against public authority” – “The line dividing preaching disaffection towards the Government and legitimate political activity in a democratic set-up cannot be neatly drawn. Where legitimate political criticism of the Government in power ends and disaffection begins, cannot be ascertained with precision. The demarcating line is thin and wavy” – Nazir Khan v. State of Delhi, (2003) 8 SCC 461 Democracy is the essence of a system of government where the will of the people is supreme. It naturally follows that in a democracy, the freedom of speech and expression is a basic right that is guaranteed to every citizen of the country and is the corner stone of a healthy democracy. In the words of George Washington: “If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” Section 113 of Macaulay’s Draft Penal Code of 1837-39 dealt with Sedition, but was omitted from the Indian Penal Code, 1860. However it was added as Section 124-A by Act 27 of 1870 and was as follows: “124-A. Exciting Disaffection.— Whoever by words, either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, excites, or attempts to excite, feelings of disaffection to the Government established by law in British India, shall be punished …… Explanation.—Such a disapprobation of the measures of the Government as is compatible with a disposition to render obedience to the lawful authority of the Government, and to support the lawful authority of the Government against unlawful attempts to subvert or resist that authority, is not disaffection. Therefore, the making of comments on the methods of the Government, with the intention of exciting only this species of disapprobation, is not an offence within this clause.” Thereafter this section was amended by the Indian Penal Code Amendment Act (4 of 1898). As a result the single explanation to the section was replaced by three separate explanations as they stand now. This section, after successive amendments, i.e. AOs of 1937, 1948 and 1950, constitutional changes, by, the Government of India Act, 1935, the Independence Act of 1947 and the Indian Constitution of 1950. Section 124-A, now reads as under: “Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India shall be punished with transportation for life or any shorter term to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine. Explanation 1.—The expression ‘disaffection’ includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. Explanation 2.—Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection do not constitute an offence under this section. Explanation 3.—Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.” – inputs from Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, 1962 Supp (2) SCR 769. Here it is very imperative to understand as to how freedom of speech which is enshrined in Article 19 of the Constitution of India and more importantly the history of restrictions as imposed under 19(2) came about and its impact on or sustainability of section 124A of IPC. Part III of the Constitution of India bestows upon the citizens the right to Freedom of Speech. Article 19 (1) protects some of our most cherished freedoms, and the right to freedom of speech and expression falls within sub clause (a) of Article 19 (1) as: “19. (1) All citizens shall have the right— (a) to freedom of speech and expression;” However, the right under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute since clause (2) of Article 19, itself, imposes certain restrictions. The restrictions under Article 19 (2) have their own history. In the draft Constitution, Article 19 was introduced as Article 13 and clause (2) which imposed restrictions on the right to freedom of speech stated that the nothing in the Article “……shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, relating to libel, slander, defamation, sedition or any other matter which offends against decency or morality or undermines the authority or foundation of State”. After discussions, the right to freedom of speech came in as Article 19. From Clause (2) ‘Sedition’ was taken out and the last line, “undermines the authority or foundation of State” was changed to “undermines the security of or tends to overthrow, the State”. Thus our constituent assembly decided to give up the colonial legacy of sedition and moved ahead. This was also the basis of judgements, in 1950, by Supreme Court as well as couple of High Courts, wherein other than some State Acts dealing with public order, section 124A IPC, was held to be void as being not covered under the reasonable restrictions of Article 19(2). However, the above judgments, prompted introduction of the 1st Constitutional Amendment in 1951 which was hotly debated and objected to amongst other, notably by Dr. S. P. Mookerjee, but was ultimately passed, wherein further restrictions were added to Article 19 (2) i.e. relation with foreign states; Public order; incitement to offence. The reason behind this Amendment, barely one and a half years after adoption of Constitution, was summed up by then Law Minister Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, while introducing the Amendment as: “The necessity has arisen out of certain judgments which have been delivered by the Supreme Court as well as provincial High Courts” Further he said that “All these cases have resulted in the decision that they are void laws, that is to say, in view of the provisions contained in clause (2) of Article 19, the courts have held that all these Acts, however valid they might have been before the Constitution came into existence, are bad laws now, because they are inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights”. The anxiety of Dr. Ambedkar stemmed from the fact that the Apex Court had struck down various enactments/government orders passed by State Legislatures/Governments that sought to prohibit the circulation of certain newspapers on the ground that the material contained therein was likely to disturb public order. In Romesh Thappar 1950 SCR 594 and Brij Bhushan (1950) SCR 605, the Supreme Court held that since “public order” was not a permissible head under Article 19(2) for imposing restrictions, therefore, the orders/enactments were liable to be struck down. Master Tara Singh’s case decided by Punjab High Court involved the validity of Sec. 124A & 153A IPC. Thereafter by the 16th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1963 the words “the sovereignty and integrity of India” were added to Article 19 (2). In the much debated judgment, Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, 1962 Supp (2) SCR 769, the Supreme Court in 1962, upheld the constitutional validity of section 124A IPC, by holding: The expression “the Government established by law” has to be distinguished from the persons for the time being engaged in carrying on the administration. “Government established by law” is the visible symbol of the State. The very existence of the State will be in jeopardy if the Government established by law is subverted. Hence, the continued existence of the Government established by law is an essential condition of the stability of the State. That is why “sedition”, as the offence in Section 124-A has been characterised, comes, under Chapter VI relating to offences against the State. Any written or spoken words, etc. which have implicit in them the idea of subverting Government by violent means, which are compendiously included in the term “revolution”, have been made penal by the section in question. Comments, however strongly worded, expressing disapprobation of actions of the Government, without exciting those feelings which generate the inclination to cause public disorder by acts of violence, would not be penal. Disloyalty to Government established by law is not the same thing as commenting in strong terms upon the measures or acts of Government, or its agencies, so as to ameliorate the condition of the people or to secure the cancellation or alteration of those acts or measures by lawful means, that is to say, without exciting those feelings of enmity and disloyalty which imply excitement to public disorder or the use of violence. Then Supreme Court in Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar, (1966) 1 SCR 709, went on to hold that: One has to imagine three concentric circles. Law and order represents the largest circle within which is the next circle representing public order and the smallest circle represents security of State. It is then easy to see that an act may affect law and order but not public order just as an act may affect public order but not security of the State. Then came Nazir Khan v. State of Delhi, (2003) 8 SCC 461 wherein it has been held that: …Sedition is a crime against society nearly allied to that of treason, and it frequently precedes treason by a short interval. Sedition in itself is a comprehensive term, and it embraces all those practices, whether by word, deed, or writing, which are calculated to disturb the tranquillity of the State, and lead ignorant persons to endeavour to subvert the Government and laws of the country. The objects of sedition generally are to induce discontent and insurrection, and stir up opposition to the Government, and bring the administration of justice into contempt; and the very tendency of sedition is to incite the people to insurrection and rebellion. “Sedition” has been described as disloyalty in action, and the law considers as sedition all those practices which have for their object to excite discontent or dissatisfaction, to create public disturbance, or to lead to civil war; to bring into hatred or contempt the Sovereign or the Government, the laws or constitutions of the realm, and generally all endeavours to promote public disorder. The concept of the right to freedom of speech and expression was distilled by Justice R.F. Nariman in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1 holding: “There are three concepts which are fundamental in understanding the reach of this most basic of human rights. The first is discussion, the second is advocacy, and the third is incitement. Mere discussion or even advocacy of a particular cause howsoever unpopular is at the heart of Article 19(1)(a). It is only when such discussion or advocacy reaches the level of incitement that Article 19(2) kicks in.” Conclusion: So, today whatever may be said about the maintainability of section 124A IPC or that we are still continuing with colonial legacy, but, in fact it’s been “We the People of India” who in 1950 adopted Article 19 by specifically dropping ‘Sedition’ from clause (2) but in 1951 brought it back under the garb of ‘Public Order’ and not only decided to continue with the colonial legacy but subsequently either by amending the constitution or bringing in statutes imposed more curbs / fetters on the free speech. Various chances came in between but we never decided or had the courage to remove the fetters on free speech. Section 124A IPC has been used by Government & decried by Opposition since its inception, it has been used to muzzle the press or depending on the ideology of parties governing, from one spectrum to other, without exception, the voice of opposition either directly or indirectly and to target organizations / parties from extreme right to extreme left ideology depending upon the dispensation. Jury is still on, debates on social media & other forums continue to support either view point depending on the available platform, but, in spite of whatever are the pros & cons of Section 124A, there appears to be no chance in the near future that either the Legislature or the Judiciary is going to change their stance whatever may be the hue & cry.Views are personal only.(Author is a Delhi based lawyer. [email protected]) Next Story
Rayland Baxter sounds enlightened—lyrically and sonically—on his new album, Wide Awake. On previous efforts, the Nashville-based singer-songwriter, who’s toured with the Lumineers and the Head and the Heart, delivered wise observations with loose Americana grace, but this time he tightened his focus and crafted taut, vintage pop songs with shimmering Beatles-esque hooks. Baxter started the record by moving into an old tire factory turned studio in rural Kentucky, where he wrote intensely in isolation. There he came up with topical songs, sharing his take on gun control (“79 Shiny Revolvers”) and debt (“Casanova”) with sly humor and heartfelt optimism.When it was time to record, Baxter teamed up with producer Butch Walker and assembled a dynamic backing band that included Cage the Elephant’s Nick Bockrath and Dr. Dog drummer Eric Slick to fulfill his vision. He muses on the shaky state of the world with the resilience of a positive groove. Tell me about your writing retreat at the old factory in Kentucky.Around Halloween of 2016, I moved into my buddy’s recording studio that he, at that point, was just building piece by piece. I lived in there for three months; I had a bed, a Wurlitzer, and an old 1950s Gibson guitar that my dad gave me. I started writing, all day every day.I remember when I first started listening to Bob Dylan, and learning about how he would hole up in the Chelsea Hotel. That focused process worked for a lot of my favorite writers, and it’s something I’ve always wanted to do. I like my time alone. This record is more political than your past work. How did that thread in your writing start?The news channel was always on in the kitchen, so at first I was checking in on the Cubs winning the World Series. Then (after the Presidential election) this whole shift of power went down, and I noticed this rage but also people trying to come together with acceptance and love. I started analyzing my own thoughts and writing about them. That gets to the album title, Wide Awake. I wanted to write songs about some topical issues, but also just become a better songwriter. At the same time the musical arrangements are upbeat and pop-driven. That came when I was writing. I decided I wanted to make simple pop-form songs that people could carry around and not lose in a confusing chord progression. That was my focus, and then the great group of musicians I worked with made it happen. Butch Walker, who produced and played bass, is a singer-songwriter himself. Eric Slick is an incredible drummer who really got behind the groove of the rhythm guitar I set in the song demos. Everyone knew how to service the songs and lift them up. Did you find some personal resolution by the end of the album, hence the closer, “Let It All Go Man”? I think we all lose sight of the purpose of being a human being. It’s not to make money or voice our opinions on the Internet. The true purpose is to see the world for the beautiful thing that it is. It’s nice to appreciate a sunset dipping behind the mountains, or at least to find something like that every day. That song really is about an approach—a mentality. Your dad, Bucky Baxter, appears on the album. Did his past work as a guitarist with the greats like Dylan and Steve Earle influence you when you were growing up?It does now. When I was a kid I knew it was cool, but I wasn’t really concerned with all that. As time has gone on, I’ve really started to appreciate it. Now when I go back and listen to a Dylan album with my dad on it, I feel a different connection to the music. It adds more fuel to the fire for what I’m doing now. You’ve mentioned in the past that you’re into the outdoors. These days, how do you like to stretch your legs in between tour stops?On my off days I like to paddle down a river or take really long walks. When I’m home in Nashville, my family has secluded property outside of the city where I go fishing with my pops.Rayland Baxter headlines the first night of the Devils Backbone Hoopla Festival in Roseland, Va. (September 28).
Sign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Nassau County jail’s health provider was fined $350,000 and temporarily barred from working in New York State after settling a lawsuit in which the state alleged the company failed to properly treat inmates.Florida-based Armor Correctional Health Services agreed to not bid on jail health services in the state for three years under the settlement of the lawsuit announced Wednesday by State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s office, which alleged that Armor risked inmates’ health by failing to meet its contractual obligations.“For-profit jail providers must ensure that appropriate medical care is provided in jails, where many inmates suffer from complex medical needs,” Schneiderman said. “When these companies fail to uphold their contractual obligations, they not only defraud taxpayers, the health of inmates, and, by extension, the health of the general population, is jeopardized.”Nassau approved an $11 million annual contract with Armor in 2011. A month after Schneiderman filed suit against Armor in July, the company said it would not bid to renew its contract with the Nassau. In September, the county hired an independent jail health care monitor—another goal of the lawsuit—to ease the transition to a new inmate medical provider and ensure contract compliance.The state had accused Armor of neglecting to provide the county with timely statistics detailing the services it provided. Nassau then withheld payment to Armor until the company provided those stats.RELATED STORY: Nassau County Jail: Suicides, Healthcare Changes, Budget Cuts Prompt Calls For Oversight“Armor is pleased to have the New York Attorney General … matter resolved in order to focus on and expedite a smooth transition with the new medical provider in Nassau,” Armor said in a statement. “Armor provided the NY AG with clinical data that clearly supported the enhancement of patient care to an extremely acute patient population. We are exceptionally proud of our caregivers for the dedication and passion they have continually demonstrated under challenging circumstances.”The attorney general’s suit was filed after the state Commission on Corrections blamed Armor’s staff for failing to prevent the deaths of five inmates. Those deaths are subject of lawsuits filed by the inmates’ families.The state attorney general’s office will retain $100,000 of the fine as payment of penalties and the other $250,000 will be given to Nassau as reimbursement for Armor’s performance.Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano had proposed privatizing the jail’s health care in an effort to save taxpayer money in his first term.“I thank the Attorney General for his efforts in settling this matter as we move forward in contracting with a subsequent inmate health care provider,” Mangano said.
The two brands do not meet regulatory emissions standards, which are pegged to the Euro 4 standard, a widely adopted benchmark developed by the European Union.“The biggest issue here is breathing problems, especially during the dry season in big cities or in industrial areas,” Dwi Saung, a clean energy campaigner with the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi), told The Jakarta Post on Monday.Pertamina president director Nicke Widyawati acknowledged on June 29 that the company had “actually been obligated to use Euro 5 since 2017” but said, “We would have to import 100 percent if we were forced to sell Euro 5.”Her statement reflects Pertamina’s aversion to importing additional oil, per Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) Ministry policy. Oil and gas imports are a leading contributor to Indonesia’s gaping trade deficit, which has put pressure on the rupiah exchange rate. Fossil fuels accounted for 15 percent of total imports last year, Statistics Indonesia (BPS) data shows.Jakarta was declared to have the worst air pollution of any capital city in the world in August of last year, according to data from AirVisual, Switzerland’s privately-funded air quality monitoring platform.Pertamina plans to produce Euro 4 and Euro 5 fuel domestically through six refinery megaprojects that will double Indonesia’s fuel output to 2 million barrels per day. The facilities are scheduled for completion between 2022 and 2027.“If we don’t build them, we will import fuel every day,” said Nicke.However, the six refineries are facing hurdles such as land permit issues and financing problems. Two of the projects were put on hold after their partners, Oman’s Overseas Oil and Gas LLC (OOG) and Saudi Arabia’s Aramco, pulled out.Oil refineries have a slim internal rate of return (IRR), which is unattractive to many foreign investors. Pertamina is developing petrochemical facilities alongside the refineries to improve the projects’ financial appeal, said Ignatius Tallulembang, president director of PT Kilang Pertamina Internasional (KPI).Read also: Pertamina loses partners, eyes new investors for refinery megaprojects“Oil refineries alone have marginal profits. IRRs are just enough. Foreign inventors wanted IRRs of 12 or 13 percent. Saudi Aramco wanted 15 percent,” he told House of Representative (DPR) lawmakers in Jakarta on Wednesday. He did not state refineries’ expected IRR.Despite the challenges, Environment Ministry air pollution control director Dasrul Chaniago maintained that Indonesia was “still on target to enter Euro 5”.“But looking at how other countries are on Euro 5, 6 and even 7, Indonesia is better off jumping to Euro 6,” he said at a webinar hosted by the Indonesian Consumers Foundation (YLKI) in June.Topics : State-owned oil and gas giant Pertamina has reaffirmed plans to phase out pollutive fuels but a top executive has made clear that the company will not do so until certain multibillion-dollar projects are completed.Pertamina, which operates over 90 percent of Indonesia’s gas stations, is legally bound to stop producing its best-selling but pollutive diesel fuel, Solar, by April 2021. It stopped the production of gasoline brand Premium in October 2018, as required by Environment and Forestry Ministry (KLHK) Regulation No. 20/2017 on motor vehicle emission limits. Read also: Airvisual: Jakarta declared world’s most polluted city on Thursday afternoon
It may be a while before real fans can return to Bundesliga stadiums, but Borussia Moenchengladbach supporters are planning to fill the stands with the next best thing: 50,000 cardboard cut-outs of themselves. A deserted Borussia-Park, Borusia Moenchengladbach’s home stadium The German league is suspended until the end of April due to the coronavirus crisis, and games are expected to be played behind closed doors if and when the season resumes. Yet at fourth-placed Gladbach, fans now have the option to order a “life-size cardboard cut-out” of themselves – complete with photos of their faces – to occupy their usual spot on the terraces. “This way, we will be the first club to bring a bit of life back to our stadium, even if fans actually have to watch from home,” wrote supporter organisation Fanprojekt Moenchengladbach (FPMG) in an online statement on Wednesday.Advertisement Promoted ContentThe New Lara Croft Will Really Surprise YouWhat Is A Black Hole In Simple Terms?18 Beautiful Cities That Are Tourist MagnetsCan Playing Too Many Video Games Hurt Your Body?6 Extreme Facts About Hurricanes9 Facts You Should Know Before Getting A TattooYou’ve Only Seen Such Colorful Hairdos In A Handful Of Anime10 Risky Jobs Some Women Do7 Things That Actually Ruin Your PhoneA Guy Turns Gray Walls And Simple Bricks Into Works Of Art11 Most Immersive Game To Play On Your Table TopWho Is The Most Powerful Woman On Earth? Read Also: Barcelona facing €100M loss amid Covid 19 outbreakThe Bundesliga is currently on hold until April 30, with clubs set to meet later this week to discuss further plans.The league has said it hopes to play out the season in order to ensure TV revenues crucial to the financial stability of some of its clubs.Gladbach hosted the last fixture to date on March 11, when they beat local rivals Cologne in the first Bundesliga game ever to be held behind closed doors.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 Loading… For 19 euros ($21), Gladbach fans can buy the cardboard cut-out, which FPMG said would actually be made of “weather-proof plastic”. The proceeds would help to keep FPMG’s seven employees in a job, with some of the money also donated to good causes close to the club, organisers said. The figures themselves, meanwhile, are to be produced by two small firms in Moenchengladbach which have been forced to close during the crisis. “We won’t be making any profits, and when the ‘war’ is won, everyone can take home their doppelganger as a reminder of these curious times,” said FPMG. Empty seats and stands at Borussia-Park football stadium, home of Borussia Moenchengladbach
The two players will enter into today’s finals with 27 points added to their ITF ranking. But the winner will however get seven points more for winning the first leg.Safwat had come to the Abuja tournament for the first time after winning 42 Futures tournament in Egypt out of the 52 he played. The Abuja performance will help improve his ranking.The second leg of the Tombim /ITF Futures Tournament starts on Monday after Sunday break with all the players battling for the points needed to break into the Challenger series.Only Moses Michael got to the Quater finals before losing out to David Perez, out of the four Nigerian players including Imeh Joseph, Sylvester Emmanuel and Thomas Otu, were dumped after picking the wild cards for the tournament.Share this:FacebookRedditTwitterPrintPinterestEmailWhatsAppSkypeLinkedInTumblrPocketTelegram Africa’s leading tennis player Mohammed Safwat of Egypt, took two hours yesterday to despatch Nicholas Meister of the United States 6- 4, 6-4 to reach the Tombim Futures Tennis Tournament in Abuja. Playing at the centre courts of the of the Abuja Tennis Club, Safwat ranked 276 and seeded number two for the Tombim/ITF tournament showed enough experience as he combined his baseline play to outwit the rugged American ranked 360 and seeded number four for the Tombim.Safwat will now meet Antal van Der Duim of the Netherlands who also outplayed David Perez Sans of Spain 7-6, 6-3 in another thrilling encounter also decided at the Centre courts of the National Stadium Tennis Courts.Many had given Perez the number one seed and ITF ranked 259 player the game against VanDer Duim ranked 355 by the ITF , even before the first service, but Van Der Duim showed enough strength to take the first set which went into tie break at 7-6. He finally dumped Perez 6-3 to book a place for today’s first leg finals which comes up at the same venue by 3;pm
An impressive line-up of young stars will parade their skills this afternoon in the 2016 renewal of the All-Manning, All-daCosta XI football match, set for the STETHS Football Complex at 4 p.m.The clash forms part of a double-header that will be preceded by the Jamaican Under-17 versus ISSA Academic XI at 2 p.m.The two matches are expected to rekindle excitement for schoolboy football fans and will also provide an opportunity for scouts, mainly from United States colleges, to have a first-hand look at potential young stars.Manning Cup champions Jamaica College (JC) will have several players in the All-Manning starting eleven, as will St George’s College, who will be represented by golden boot awardee Alex Marshall and Chevon Stewart.Donovan Dawkins, the man whose clinical header was enough to win JC the urban-area title in December, is also among the All-Manning stars on show. JC’s title-winning coach, Miguel Coley, will issue instructions for the All-Manning team, who won it last year by a 3-1 score line.Dinthill Technical’s Rodave Murray will lead the attack for the All-daCosta team, which also features the hard-running Neville Morgan and Shevar McCullugh from rural area champions STETHS.The talented attacking midfielder from Rusea’s Deshane Beckford, is also among the big-name players to turn out for the rural area eleven, which will be guided by STETHS coach Omar Wedderburn.The match will give the daCosta Cup XI another chance at redemption as their urban-area counterparts have set themselves apart in recent years with strong victories, as demonstrated in the newly contested Flow Super Cup, which was won by JC in 2014 and St George’s College in 2015.Entrance fee is $200.