At a time that Pakistan appears to be imploding under the strain of its political tug of war brought about by years of military domination, economic failures and security woes, the Lahore High Court has provided a glimpse of a country that could have been, and yet might emerge, despite all its trials and tribulations. The Lahore High Court ruling striking down Section 124-A of the Pakistan Penal Code — the “sedition law” that Pakistan and India inherited from the British-imposed Indian Penal Code and that was adopted almost in its entirety by the two countries at independence — is a landmark decision that seeks to draw a line under colonial rule, and its offspring, “the colonial mindset”.
The section, introduced in 1870, 10 years after the Penal Code was introduced, was intended to stifle the voices of those opposed to colonial rule. The first person to be convicted for sedition was Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1897. He would be charged twice more for inciting “disaffection”, convicted in one case and acquitted in the other (both times Mohammed Ali Jinnah was his lawyer). Nearly identically worded in India and Pakistan, Section 124-A says 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 will be punished with a prison sentence that can range from months to life, and/or a fine. In the manner in which the law has been deployed on the both sides of the border in recent years against political opponents, journalists, satirists, cartoonists and other critics of those in power, “disaffection”, which means a feeling of dissatisfaction usually with those who wield authority, has been equated with dissent, and had led to the criminalisation of a perfectly legitimate activity in a democracy.
The detailed judgment of the Lahore High Court is awaited. Justice Shahid Karim declared the law null and void in response to a batch of petitions seeking to declare the provision as ultra vires the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 19A of the 1973 Pakistan Constitution. The petitions argued that the colonial-era relic was being used as a tool for “illegitimate limitation” on these constitutional freedoms. While a High Court ruling is open to review and may be challenged in the Supreme Court, the bold move to do away with a 153-year-old law, for which there should be no place in a democratic country, will certainly inspire those who have been agitating against the law in India.
