Congress MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi on Saturday lashed out at the Narendra Modi government for its recent handling of sedition cases, saying the Centre had forgotten the true meaning of democracy and was making the country “become like our neighbours, who are constitutional wrecks”.
Referring to the landmark Supreme Court judgment of 1962 in the ‘Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar’ case, Singhvi said the current dispensation was ignoring the legal precedent for sedition and was misusing the charge.
“The Kedar Nath case defined sedition 60 years ago, saying that unless the speech is accompanied by over concrete acts like violence, it cannot be termed sedition. People have forgotten this judgment,” he told a press meet at the Congress state headquarters in Calcutta, a day after Amulya Leona Noronha, a young woman in Karnataka, had been charged with sedition for chanting “Pakistan Zindabad” at an anti-CAA rally.
“I condemn her personally for such comments, but this country is a democracy, which the current government has forgotten… Today, even if you sneeze, you will be charged with sedition,” Singhvi said.
He laid out how sedition charges were part of the BJP dispensation’s larger ploy at being a “snooping, controlling” government.
Singhvi related his comments on free speech to a famous statement attributed to 18th century French writer Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
“The CAA was born two months ago, and since then, 194 cases of sedition have been filed. Even the British could not have bettered such a record,” he added.
Singhvi also lambasted the BJP government’s delay in tabling the Data Protection Bill in Parliament, claiming that the Centre had deliberately stalled it for “more than five years” and had “fast tracked” Aadhaar to precede the DPB so that they could have more control on data collection.
The Rajya Sabha member also brought up a recent note sent by Justice B.N. Srikrishna to the joint select committee in Parliament claiming that the bill’s newer provision could lead to “an Orwellian state”.
“The point is they (the government) will define personal and non personal data in a ridiculous manner and then say that any direction from the government to provide data is binding,” he said.
“George Orwell and (Joseph) Stalin would have smiled benignly to see the world’s largest democracy practicing a culture, legacy, and heritage that is unknown to this country,” he added.
