Freedom of speech and expression is the foundation of democracy. Citizens must actively engage in discussions and voice their constructive criticism of government initiatives for a democracy to exist. Bangladesh as a democratic country ensures freedom of speech and expression under Article 39(2) of the constitution. But such freedom is subjected to reasonable restrictions imposed by other laws which justify sedition for the sake of national security. However, sedition laws can also be used by governments to silence dissenting voices and suppress opposition, which can undermine the principles of democracy and human rights.
Chapter VI of Penal Code, 1860 deals with offenses against the state where Section 124A defines sedition and criminalizes it with imprisonment -- up to life -- and possibly an added fine. In 2011 through the fifteenth amendment, Art 7A was inserted to the constitution to strengthen sedition relating provisions of Bangladesh.
British colonial rulers introduced sedition laws. The main reason to introduce these laws was to suppress political opposition and criticism against colonial rule. Indian nationalists including Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak were imprisoned by such laws. Gandhi referred to these provisions as the “prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.” Even after almost a century since being a British colony, the government of Bangladesh still continues to utilize this law as a potent instrument to criminalize dissent and imprison peaceful opponents of the government.
State v country
According to German sociologist Max Weber, a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory which indicates the government of a country. Political geography and international politics defines a country as a geographical territory which would be the land of a person's birth, residence, or citizenship; a political state or nation or its territory.
Thus, the concept of state and country differs from one another. Offences against state typically refers to such criminal offenses that are committed against the government or the political system where offense against country refers to any criminal offense that harms the interests or wellbeing of a country. It is a debatable issue whether a country should penalize offenses against the state or offences against the country.
Sedition laws elsewhere
While we cling to ancient British colonial laws of sedition, Britain itself abolished its sedition laws in 2009. The United States contains sedition laws only in its books. In the case of Bradenburg v Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court had drawn a high bar for government restrictions on freedom of speech. In 2007, New Zealand repealed its sedition laws. Australia and Canada have other laws that can be used to restrict certain types of speech or expression like laws relating to defamation, hate speech, national security, or public order, but they do not have actual sedition laws.
Our neighbouring country India holds the same sedition laws in its penal code like us. In 2019, journalist Kishorechandra Wangkhem criticized the ruling party as a citizen of a democratic country in his facebook post. Later he was charged under sedition laws of India. Subsequently the sentences were dismissed by the High Court by ruling that sedition law had been misused here. After a year in 2020, climate activist Disha Ravi was charged with sedition after disseminating a toolkit on social media related to the ongoing farmers protests. These charges are highly criticized by human rights groups and activists. However, in 2022, the Supreme Court of India made a bold move in favour of freedom of speech. The central and state governments are directed to stop filing cases under the country’s sedition law for a certain period until the 152 years old provisions are strictly re-examined by the government of India.
Prominent human rights lawyer and eminent jurist Dr Shadheen Malik argued that sedition laws are contradictory with the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and expression and they should be abolished or reformed as soon as possible to keep them in line with international human rights standards.
Sedition laws can also be used by governments to silence dissenting voices and suppress opposition, which can undermine the principles of democracy and human rights
Misuse in Bangladesh
There are some cases in Bangladesh which have been controversial and have raised concerns about the use of sedition to silent dissent and criticism of the government in the name of national security. The case of photographer and activist Shahidul Alam (2018) is perhaps one of the most high-profile cases. Human rights groups and international organizations deeply condemned the charges brought against him. The 2015 case of journalist Shafik Rehman is another case which caught the world’s attention. He was also charged with sedition, whereas Rehman denied the charges and argued that they were politically motivated. In both cases the charges of sedition were eventually dropped.
Legal critics of Bangladesh argue that the sedition laws are being used to criminalize peaceful dissent and legitimate criticism of the government which is a major threat in modern democracy. The voices of journalists are often suppressed by sedition laws here. In a democratic process it is very important to highlight the government’s shortcomings and to criticize their activities for the well being of the nation. However, Sec 24A of penal code does not put restrictions to criticize the government to obtain lawful means; rather this section is misused by the politicians for obtaining their political will.
In Bangladesh the number of FIR lodged for sedition is more than the FIR of murder. According to a survey of India, litigations of sedition raised twice from the year of 2015 to 2018. With such high numbers, only 43 cases finished trial -- from which only four accused were convicted under sedition.
For being a non-bailable offense the allegation of sedition is itself a punishment without conviction. Sedition laws can come into use when the nation faces violation, rioting, or other activities which may threaten the national security of a country. But while there is some debate, the most commonly held view is that laws of sedition should be abolished or be amended to fit the realm of current civilization.
Dorray Shower is a student of law and a freelance contributor.
