In light of cartoonist Aseem Trivedi’s arrest under the draconian sedition law, Mumbai-based writer and journalist Dilip D’Souza speaks candidly to The Asian Age about the redundancy and impracticality of Section 124 of the Indian Penal Code, in a democracy. The writer believes that the “nonsensical” colonial law stifles freedom of expression and suppresses voices of dissent, both of which disempower the citizens of the country and deny them their constitutional rights.

How do you view the sedition charge levied by the police on Aseem Trivedi?
In a word? Nonsensical. And on so many levels. First of all, take a look at the language of the sedition law (Section 124A, IPC) and then ask, “Do Trivedi’s cartoons “excite” hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the government?” Then add to that the Supreme Court’s Kedar Nath judgment of 1962, which says without ambiguity that it can only be sedition if there has been “incitement to violence”. Has Trivedi incited people to violence? And then there’s the issue of free expression. I think Trivedi’s cartoons are amateurish and unfunny, but that doesn’t mean he cannot draw them. Our Constitution gives him the right to do so…Why are we violating that?

Does a law like sedition have any place in democracy?
No! To me, democracy by definition means differing points of view. Some of us might find those points of view offensive, but that’s the way a democracy functions — it allows every voice to be heard. Without that, it’s not a democracy, simple.

Is there any need to enforce restriction on freedom of expression?
No. Or at least, not officially. I mean, it’s like this: if I know my friend is about to say/write/draw something that I’m sure will offend people and the government, I might tell him quietly, “Don’t do this, there are consequences”. That’s my duty as a friend. But if he chooses to go ahead, I’ll defend his right to express himself. That’s my duty as a citizen, and I see no conflict there at all. Is that a restriction on freedom of expression? I don’t see it as such. But certainly the government should not be trying to enforce any restriction.

Has it (sedition law) become a tool in the hands of the government to suppress voices of dissent. Does it mean sedition can be used to quieten criticism of the government?
Of course: Yes and yes. Over 8,000 protesters in Koodankulam have been charged with sedition. What does this even mean? Those people standing in sea water for hours on end…are they being seditious? There are plenty more examples. The government certainly wants to dispense with criticism because it has no answers to that criticism, and knows it has none.

In light of the high court’s observations regarding application of sedition on Trivedi, do you feel that the observations could come true and freedom of speech and expression could become a victim?
Freedom of speech has been under attack in one way or another for years together, and this case is no exception. There will always be someone wanting to curb that freedom. Yet the easiest thing for all of us is to stand for and uphold our freedom.

Do you feel that the government is trying to squirm out of this embarrassing situation by passing the buck on to the Mumbai police and trying to find a scape goat for the “frivolous act”?
Of course. But then what’s new? Governments always get into such situations.