Those presiding over Law Commission wanting to strengthen sedition law is dangerous

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*
The Law Commission has given a report to government of India suggesting that anti Sedition law should be further strengthened and penalty must be made more stringent. So penalise people for this 'crime' to life imprisonment. The maximum penalty for Sedition is set at three years at the moment. In the last 10 years, this provision was used mostly against the intellectuals and dissenters of this government who were blamed as 'urban naxals' and 'anti national'.

Most of the legal luminaries including many former judges have actually asked for complete abrogation of this law as they feel no modern democracy can allow such dangerous laws to punish the political dissenters. In democracy, dissent and disagreement are part as long as everyone stick to rule based order which also stick to modern human rights perspective, respect international laws and treaties.

One can understand that the demand from the 'devotees' of our prime minister and his government, that this law should be strengthened with more stringent provisions but when this come from a person who is chairperson of the Law Commission then it is a warning. It is an indication in which direction the win is blowing and what is the government thinking.

That a man presiding over Law Commission could give such a report which can ultimately overthrow the whole idea of democracy is dangerous and I hope judiciary will be watching this that there are people in their fraternity who may not like the very idea of 'constitutional democracy'. Look at what have been presented to us in the form of judgement and any fair person would feel extremely disturbed. At least no one can be proud of such judgements which do not have constitutional basis.
When the Law Commission report was made public, we saw another 'landmark' judgement from 'Allahabad High Court'. A single judge bench was listening to the matter of 'rape' which was basically the relationship between two individuals and the boy refused to marry the girl because according to him the girl was 'Mangalik'. The Judge Saheb asked the authority to verify from known astrologers whether that was true. Is not it offending.

Whether one is Mangalik or not is not the issue when one decides the case of marital or personal disputes. Giving bail or no bail should be done purely on legal constitutional back ground but judge Saheb brought astrologers into the picture to decide the case. Is it a slip of tongue judgement or it is the trend because of the mediocre political affiliation that are ultimately working to get into the judiciary. Whatever is the issue, we can definitely not feel proud of such judgement.
This is the most unfortunate part when judgements are based not on the grounds of legality as per our constitution but more and more they are 'speeches' and 'personal beliefs' of the individual giving judgement. This is dangerous.

How can a person can be held guilty by one judge and not so guilty by the other. Law and judgements have become highly subjective based on who is the judge and his political thoughts. Hence, it is important that critical issues should not be left to single judge benches otherwise we will see judgements like Female peacock getting impregnated by tears and not by mating with the male partner.
Whether it is law commission report or the Allahabad High Court judgement or any other court speaking against various provisions in law, they are matter of great concern as how Constitutional protection measures are being broken into pieces by those who need to protect it. I hope the Supreme Court will take note of it and issue necessary guidelines. Time has come for the Chief Justice of India to send a critical note to fellow judges of the high court regarding this so that respect and regard for the judiciary remain intact.
---

*Human rights defender

Comments

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman* In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Trade pacts with EU, US raise alarms over farmers, MSMEs and policy space

By A Representative A broad coalition of farmers’ organisations, trade unions, traders, public health advocates and environmental groups has raised serious concerns over India’s recently concluded trade agreements with the European Union and the United States, warning that the deals could have far-reaching implications for livelihoods, policy autonomy and the country’s long-term development trajectory. In a public statement issued, the Forum for Trade Justice described the two agreements as marking a “tectonic shift” in India’s trade policy and cautioned that the projected gains in exports may come at a significant social and economic cost.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Michael Parenti: Scholar known for critiques of capitalism and U.S. foreign policy

By Harsh Thakor* Michael Parenti, an American political scientist, historian, and author known for his Marxist and anti-imperialist perspectives, died on January 24 at the age of 92. Over several decades, Parenti wrote and lectured extensively on issues of capitalism, imperialism, democracy, media, and U.S. foreign policy. His work consistently challenged dominant political and economic narratives, particularly those associated with Western liberal democracies and global capitalism.

Search This Blog