Hyderabad: Senior Supreme Court advocate Colin Gonsalves on Monday highlighted the need to understand the interpretation of murder and terrorism.
Speaking on 'The Rise of Fascism and Question of Law and Judiciary' at the second day of the International Seminar on Fascism organised by Arvind Memorial Trust at Bagh Lingampally, Gonsalves highlighted various examples of resistance emerging from courts when fascist power rules supreme.
For example, the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi was deemed a murder, not terrorism, as per the court's judgment. Tamil militants, driven by personal enmity over his decision to send the Indian Army to fight for Sri Lanka, were not aiming to overhaul the Indian state, distinguishing their actions from terrorism.
This example is in stark contrast to the present-day misuse of anti-terror laws like UAPA, against activists like Umar Khaled, members of the Pinjra Tod movement and others. Accused of terrorism for simply using words, raising slogans and organising street plays, they were held without evidence of armed violence, violating their fundamental right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution in Article 19(1)a.
Justice Nageswar Rao, in a notable judgment, highlighted the lack of violence in the Pinjra Tod case, where activists were jailed for two years. Similarly, Khaled, who has been in jail for the past five years now, has been incarcerated for 'provocative' speech without evidence of sedition or warfare against the state. "The Constitution protects freedom of expression, even when it criticises the government, but dissenters face increasing suppression under a regime intolerant of opposition," the advocate said.
Gonsalves emphasised that historically, sedition under British rule targeted armed rebellion. Post-independence, the Supreme Court's Kedarnath judgment clarified that sedition requires evidence of violence or incitement, not mere criticism. Despite this, recent cases, like that of journalist Kishorechandra Wangkhem jailed for using abusive words against a Chief Minister, reveal the state's misuse of sedition laws to stifle dissent.
“Activists like Sudha Bharadwaj, imprisoned for an unverified letter written by some mysterious third party linking her to Naxalites, and tribal advocate Soni Sori, who exposed atrocities against Adivasis, embody resistance against state overreach," he said.
Similarly, there are testimonies from Chhattisgarh tribals who recounted the brutal killings that highlight the government's targeting of innocent tribals.
"Maybe there were Maoists among them, but what led to the death of hundreds of tribals? One of them responded, 'The government wants us out of here so that it can make way for unbridled mining activity.'"
A similar string of events in Manipur where violence between Kukis and Meitei communities did not receive any response from the Prime Minister could hint towards an intent to take advantage of the turmoil and capitalise on the abundant mineral resources in the region.
Moreover, Delhi riots and Jamia protests reflect the state’s disproportionate use of force, from brutal crackdowns to arrests of protesters. Indiscriminate use of force which did not even spare women's hostels and a mosque. Additionally, the judiciary, today constrained by political influence, struggles to safeguard freedoms. The transfer of Justice Muralidhar during a hate speech case against BJP leaders in the context of Delhi riots exemplifies this.
"This pattern signals an alarming rise in state-led oppression, which could be labelled as fascism. Protest, an essential democratic tool, is increasingly criminalised, threatening India's foundational rights to dissent and free speech," Gonsalves said. He hoped that in time to come, certain resistance will take place and society will see signs of change.
The seminar will continue to take place till January 3 and will see paper readings from prominent authors and heated discussions on the various facets of Fascism in the 21st century.
