TheLeaflet
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Why Leaflet
    • Leaflet Team
  • Constitutional Law
  • Human Rights
  • Culture
    • Book Review
    • Movie Review
    • Poetry
  • Humour
  • Issues
    • Analysis
    • Case update
    • Child’s Rights
    • Civil Law
    • Coronavirus and the Law
    • Criminal Justice System
    • Criminal Law
    • Dalit Rights
    • Editor’s Desk
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fundamental Rights
    • Gender Rights
    • Governance
    • Health Rights
    • History
    • International Law
    • Judiciary
    • Juvenile Justice
    • Know Your Rights
    • Labour Law
    • Law and Technology
    • Litigation
    • Mental Health
    • Policy
    • Politics
    • Right To Informtion
    • Sexual Offences
    • Social Justice
  • Leaflet Specials
    • Independence Day Special
    • Independence of judiciary
    • Right to Privacy
    • Special Issue: Emergency
    • The legacy of Ruth Ginsburg
    • Triple Talaq
    • Two years since Navtej Johar case
  • Videos
  • Historical Series
  • Contact us
    • Write For Us
    • Careers
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Why Leaflet
    • Leaflet Team
  • Constitutional Law
  • Human Rights
  • Culture
    • Book Review
    • Movie Review
    • Poetry
  • Humour
  • Issues
    • Analysis
    • Case update
    • Child’s Rights
    • Civil Law
    • Coronavirus and the Law
    • Criminal Justice System
    • Criminal Law
    • Dalit Rights
    • Editor’s Desk
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fundamental Rights
    • Gender Rights
    • Governance
    • Health Rights
    • History
    • International Law
    • Judiciary
    • Juvenile Justice
    • Know Your Rights
    • Labour Law
    • Law and Technology
    • Litigation
    • Mental Health
    • Policy
    • Politics
    • Right To Informtion
    • Sexual Offences
    • Social Justice
  • Leaflet Specials
    • Independence Day Special
    • Independence of judiciary
    • Right to Privacy
    • Special Issue: Emergency
    • The legacy of Ruth Ginsburg
    • Triple Talaq
    • Two years since Navtej Johar case
  • Videos
  • Historical Series
  • Contact us
    • Write For Us
    • Careers
No Result
View All Result
TheLeaflet
No Result
View All Result
in Analysis Democracy and Rule of Law Freedom of Speech Fundamental Rights Governance

Kerala CM’s climb-down: Puts on hold controversial amendment to the Police Act

N V RAVINDRANATHAN NAIRbyN V RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR
November 23, 2020
in Analysis, Democracy and Rule of Law, Freedom of Speech, Fundamental Rights, Governance
Kerala CM’s climb-down: Puts on hold controversial amendment to the Police Act

In the face of an onslaught of criticism for an ordinance amending the Kerala Police Act, Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has put it on hold for the time being. The ordinance sought to punish those guilty of spreading content by any means (including social media) that was considered derogatory or defamatory. There were provisions to award three years’ jail term, a fine of Rs 10,000 or both. The authoritarian chief minister who is ruthless in silencing dissent and has scant regard for critics, has truly been caught by surprise says N V RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR reporting from Thiruvananthapuram.

——–

Faced with virulent criticism and massive protests, the Kerala government has put on hold a controversial ordinance amending Section 118 (A) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011. This would have enabled arrests for any social media abuse or offensive content deemed defamatory.

The manner in which Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and his colleague, Law Minister AK Balan, tried to push through the ordinance evoked strong criticism from all quarters as it was a clear deviation from the CPM’s known stand on protecting the freedom of expression and democracy.

Fear of Elections in December

The fact that the government was forced to retreat fearing backlash at a time when the state is going to the polls for local bodies in December and the all-important assembly polls in May next year has been a major setback to the chief minister. He said that the amendment to the Kerala Police Act would not be implemented “for now”.

Vijayan reportedly said: “About the promulgation of the ordinance to amend the Police Act, different views have been expressed from different quarters. Even the LDF supporters who stood for the protection of democracy expressed their concerns. In this situation, it’s not intended to amend the law.” He also said that detailed discussions would be held in the assembly before going ahead with the ordinance.

The manner in which Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and his colleague, Law Minister AK Balan, tried to push through the ordinance evoked strong criticism from all quarters as it was a clear deviation from the CPM’s known stand on protecting the freedom of expression and democracy.

This is a major climb down for the CM as he had taken an unrelenting stand earlier and said that all those who post content “defamatory” to individuals would be arrested, jailed and fined.

It was on November 21 that Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan had signed the ordinance which sought to punish those guilty of spreading content by any means (including social media) that was considered derogatory or defamatory. There were provisions to award three years’ jail term, a fine of Rs 10,000, or both.

This led to a huge furore with not just the Opposition, but also cultural leaders, media persons, activists and legal experts sensing danger in the move. They stressed that the amended Act could empower the police to book anyone. Moreover, it could be used to suppress free speech, silence critics and target hostile media.

Why is Sitaram Yechury silent?

Till the other day, the chief minister was reiterating that the amended Police Act would in no way be used against free speech or impartial journalism. But legal experts like Prashant Bhushan wondered how CPM general secretary Sitaram Yechury could defend the state government’s stand.

The fact that the government was forced to retreat fearing backlash at a time when the state is going to the polls for local bodies in December and the all-important assembly polls in May next year has been a major setback to the chief minister. 

Critics pointed out that the Supreme Court had struck down similar laws–Section 66A of the IT Act and Section 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act.

But Law Minister Balan and the chief minister felt that following the repeal of these laws, there was no alternative legislation to deal with the crimes.

Vijayan’s main argument was that there had been complaints of women being harassed in cyberspace. There were also complaints of some online channels unleashing derogatory content against women from the tinsel world.

RSP leaders in their petition submitted that many of the expressions used in Section 118A are only cosmetically different from those which were already considered and rejected as vague in the Shreya Singhal case by the Supreme Court. The Court had struck down Section 66-A (punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service) as violative of Article 19 (1) (a) and not being saved under Article 19 (2).

Section 118A of the Act provides punishment for making, expressing, publishing, or disseminating any matter which is threatening, abusive, humiliating or defamatory.

However, left legal expert Kaleeswarm Raj wrote an edit page article in a major daily questioning the logic of bringing an ordinance which bypassed the assembly and claiming that it was to protect women in cyberspace. He said that Sections 354 (A), (B), (C) and (D) of the IPC were effective enough to protect women in cyber space. “If the very law is wrong, it cannot be implemented rightly,” he said.

Kerala High Court moved

Meanwhile, state BJP chief K Surendran, Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) leaders Shibu Baby John, NK Premachandran and AA Azeez moved the Kerala High Court seeking to quash the amendment.

Terming it as a draconian law, Surendran argued that the amendment curtails the freedom of speech and expression conferred under the Constitution of India.

Pinarayi Vijayan, known for exerting hegemonic control over the party, has been ruthless in silencing voices of dissent. He always wanted the same strategy and style to be followed in dealing with the Opposition.  With scant regard for his critics, his intention was to bring the ordinance to make it yet another tool of oppression and silence opposition when the state goes to the polls. 

The petition stated that the words used in Section 118A are not properly defined and could be interpreted in different ways and are of a general nature. “Injury to the mind” is not defined. Even the word “mind” is an abstract concept that is difficult to be defined. In the light of Section 118A, it may not be even possible to criticise the past performance of a representative for fear of prosecution, he added.

RSP leaders in their petition submitted that many of the expressions used in Section 118A are only cosmetically different from those which were already considered and rejected as vague in the Shreya Singhal case by the Supreme Court. The Court had struck down Section 66-A (punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service) as violative of Article 19 (1) (a) and not being saved under Article 19 (2).

“In the new amendment, expressions such as ‘humiliating’, ‘threatening’ and ‘abusing’ are not defined. Leaving such expressions to the subjective interpretation of individuals means that even diligent and conscientious citizens cannot know with certainty as to whether their acts of expressions could run afoul of Section 118A. The objects of introducing Section 118A could have been achieved through existing legal provisions which are less restrictive of the right to free speech and expression,” the petition read.

During his four-and-a-half-year tenure, eight persons were shot dead on the pretext that they were Maoists. Several cases of custodial torture and even murders have been reported. 

Vijayan, known for exerting hegemonic control over the party, has been ruthless in silencing voices of dissent.

He always wanted the same strategy and style to be followed in dealing with the Opposition.

With scant regard for his critics, his intention was to bring the ordinance to make it yet another tool of oppression and silence opposition when the state goes to the polls.

During his four-and-a-half-year tenure, eight persons were shot dead on the pretext that they were Maoists. Several cases of custodial torture and even murders have been reported.

During the riots that broke out in the wake of the Supreme Court’s verdict on young women’s entry into Sabarimala Temple, his government registered many cases and arrested over 30,000 people. Among them, were women and children.

His authoritarian acts have made his party colleagues silent. But his latest effort to silence critics has come a cropper.

(NV Ravindranathan Nair is a senior journalist based in Thiruvananthapuram. He also writes on environment, culture, society and issues of human interest.  Views are personal.)   

Tags: abusive postsChief Minister Pinarayi Vijayancriminal lawcyber crimefake newsfreedom of speechhate speechKerala GovernmentKerala Police ActOrdinanceSlider PostSocial Media

Related Posts

Parliament Watch

Opposition unity crucial in Budget Session 2021

byKalyani Shankar
As Assam pushes to produce rubber, India may be less dependent on imports
Policy

As Assam pushes to produce rubber, India may be less dependent on imports

byAshis Biswas
Historical Series: Justice Harilal Kania and The Criminal Contempt Case of 1942
Right to Life

Bombay HC sets free woman detained by parents for her relationship with Muslim man

byThe Leaflet

Editor's Pick

Can the State Dictate what Religion you will Follow and who you will Marry?

Can the State Dictate what Religion you will Follow and who you will Marry?

byIndira Jaising

India’s Polarised Media Reflects Crisis of Confidence in its Politics

India’s Polarised Media Reflects Crisis of Confidence in its Politics

byRevathi Siva Kumar

Munawar Faruqui:  Real Villain is Divisive Heartland Politics, Not Stand-up Comics

Munawar Faruqui: Real Villain is Divisive Heartland Politics, Not Stand-up Comics

byParsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr

Dilip Chhabria made crores designing cars, then why did he design creative ways to defraud banks?

Dilip Chhabria made crores designing cars, then why did he design creative ways to defraud banks?

byRamesh Menon

Latest by TheLeaflet

Opposition unity crucial in Budget Session 2021

January 20, 2021
As Assam pushes to produce rubber, India may be less dependent on imports

As Assam pushes to produce rubber, India may be less dependent on imports

January 20, 2021
Historical Series: Justice Harilal Kania and The Criminal Contempt Case of 1942

Bombay HC sets free woman detained by parents for her relationship with Muslim man

January 20, 2021
Bar Council of India demands free laptops, iPads, WiFi for needy lawyers

BCI steps towards exclusivity and elitism by favouring 3-year experience at the Bar for judicial services exam

January 20, 2021

Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox!

Follow Us

© 2020 TheLeaflet

SUBSCRIBE FOR UPDATES
×

Subscribe to The Leaflet

Enter your email address to subscribe to The Leaflet and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Home
  • About Us
    • Why Leaflet
    • Leaflet Team
  • Constitutional Law
  • Human Rights
  • Culture
    • Book Review
    • Movie Review
    • Poetry
  • Humour
  • Issues
    • Analysis
    • Case update
    • Child’s Rights
    • Civil Law
    • Coronavirus and the Law
    • Criminal Justice System
    • Criminal Law
    • Dalit Rights
    • Editor’s Desk
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fundamental Rights
    • Gender Rights
    • Governance
    • Health Rights
    • History
    • International Law
    • Judiciary
    • Juvenile Justice
    • Know Your Rights
    • Labour Law
    • Law and Technology
    • Litigation
    • Mental Health
    • Policy
    • Politics
    • Right To Informtion
    • Sexual Offences
    • Social Justice
  • Leaflet Specials
    • Independence Day Special
    • Independence of judiciary
    • Right to Privacy
    • Special Issue: Emergency
    • The legacy of Ruth Ginsburg
    • Triple Talaq
    • Two years since Navtej Johar case
  • Videos
  • Historical Series
  • Contact us
    • Write For Us
    • Careers

© 2020 TheLeaflet