Notices to Centre, provinces on plea against sedition law

Published February 11, 2020
The petition was filed by Ammar Ali Jan, a student rights activist. — Dawn/File
The petition was filed by Ammar Ali Jan, a student rights activist. — Dawn/File

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Monday issued notices to the federal and provincial governments on a petition seeking a declaration that section 124-A of PPC, which deals with offence of sedition, was in contradiction with the fundamental rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution.

The petition was filed by Ammar Ali Jan, a student rights activist, which also questioned legality of an FIR lodged against him and others mainly under the impugned section of PPC for holding “Student Solidarity March” on The Mall.

Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Abid Saqi appeared on behalf of the petitioner as Justice Anwarul Haq Pannun took up the petition.

Presenting a brief history of offence of sedition, the counsel stated the law of sedition originally was drafted in 1837 by Thomas Macaulay, the British historian-politician, but was omitted when the Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860.

Thereafter, he said, in 1870, the same was inserted in Indian Penal Code, 1860 through Penal Code (Amendment) Act, 1870 by James Stephen when the colonial masters felt the need to perpetuate their imperial rule. He said it was one of the many draconian laws brought into force to suppress any voices of dissent at that time.

Saqi said the law of sedition as contained in section 124-A of PPC was a relic of oppressive colonial legacy which had been introduced to rule the subjects - not citizens.

Therefore, he argued, the provisions of section 124-A PPC were repugnant to the constitutional guarantees including freedom of speech, movement, assembly, association and of expression provided under articles 15, 16, 17 and 19 of the Constitution.

The counsel said the impugned section be declared void and ultra vires being inconsistent with and in derogation of fundamental rights in view of the mandate of article 8.

He asked the court to quash the FIR registered by Civil Lines police against the petitioner and other participants in the march for being unlawful.

The judge directed the respondents to submit their replies by next date of hearing.

Published in Dawn, February 11th, 2020

Opinion

Editorial

Mineral wealth
Updated 10 Apr, 2025

Mineral wealth

The Baloch unrest is partly the result of the belief that the province’s resources are being used for the rest of the country rather than for Balochistan’s economic development.
Senate shortfalls
10 Apr, 2025

Senate shortfalls

THE latest Citizens’ Report by Pildat on the performance of the Senate of Pakistan is a sobering account of...
Crypto coup
10 Apr, 2025

Crypto coup

IT is quite the coup. One of the most recognisable names in the global cryptocurrency market has been roped in by ...
Following through
Updated 09 Apr, 2025

Following through

Reconciliation, development, and deradicalisation initiatives cannot remain dormant words in a policy document.
Robe rebellion
09 Apr, 2025

Robe rebellion

THE unrest within the Islamabad High Court shows no sign of abating, and it is perhaps just as well that the ...
Fearing birth
09 Apr, 2025

Fearing birth

AMID dramatic aid cuts, the WHO has sounded the alarm about the dangers to Pakistan’s mothers and newborns, asking...