Maharashtra Government’s words twisted in attempt to create “Emergency” by Rumour Landmines

Recently, Director Vivek Agnihotri wrote about “Rumour Landmines” who used social media to spread untruths. The piece was in context of the “Naresh Kanodia heading Oscar Jury” rumour which we had written about. And now, the “Rumour landmines” were at it again. This time it was an alleged “undemocratic” order issued by Fadnavis led Maharashtra Government, which would lead the country to being another “North Korea”. So first let us meet the “rumour landmines”:

- Advertisement - - Article resumes -

1
(Tweet was later deleted)

Another highly misleading report was this one on India Today. So what did Maharashtra Government actually do? The Government’s circular (in Marathi) can be accessed here, The English version of the guidelines can be found at the bottom of the same file. We would like to present a brief summary of the same.

Firstly, the Government referred to the sedition case which was filed against Aseem Trivedi for his cartoons, in 2011. It noted that after legal advice from the Advocate General, charges of sedition were dropped against Trivedi.

Next the Government said that in order to prevent such actions by police in the future, some guidelines were being issued to the cops now, which they should keep in mind while invoking section 124 A i.e. Sedition. The guidelines were:

1. In order to slap Sedition charges, words, signs etc must bring the state/Central government into hatred/contempt/disaffection AND must be with the intention of inciting violence/creating public disorder

2. Words or signs against politicians or public servants will be considered seditious only if the words or signs show the politicians and public servants as representatives of the Government.

3. Anything expressing disapproval of government and criticising government seeking a change via lawful means will not be seen as seditious.

4. Just because something is disgusting or vulgar it cannot be seditious

5. Before applying any charges of sedition, a written opinion giving reasons, must be obtained from the district law officer. Further, within 2 weeks, a written opinion must be taken from the Government Public Prosecutor.

The circular further said that the above guidelines should not be seen as all-encompassing and specific facts of the matter must be looked into before using section 124 A.

So in short, the Government tried to remove ambiguity in application of Sec 124 A, and gave clear guidelines which said that acts which incite violence, are not looking for legal means, are targetted at Government representatives, can be considered seditious, but only after a written opinion from district law officer has been taken. Sounds fair right?

Certain media reports, like this one, carried news very similar to the above translation. Yet “Rumour landmines” latched onto some obscure media reports or some ill-thought translation by some alleged journalist. No one bothered mentioning that the guidelines clearly stated that the cops must take a written opinion from a legal officer before enforcing such sections. No one bothered understanding that it was clearly specified that something can be seditious only if it incites violence or uses illegal means.

So what is it that makes some “journalists” blindly believe anything which can be said to be being anti a section of the Political class? Is this incompetence? Or something more?

co-founder, OpIndia.com

Share and Support:
Support OpIndia by paying for content

Most read articles recently

Here is why BJP lost elections, and of course, it was deliberate

What BJP supporters need to realise is this - no political party ever wants to lose and least of all, a party led by the two most politically aggressive politicians the country has ever seen.

India cannot turn into Islamic Nation, only Modi can understand gravity and do needful: Meghalaya HC

There should be uniform law for all Indian citizens, and anybody opposing the Indian laws and constitution cannot be considered as citizens of the country, Meghalaya High Court noted

‘Will not develop areas which did not vote for me’: Rajasthan Congress MLA shortly after winning

Rajender Singh Bidhuri fought and won a close battle against BJP MLA Suresh Dhakad with a margin of 1661 votes.

BJP’s real woes: Lessons from the electoral semi-finals

The prolonged silence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP President Amit Shah on election results was very telling. The results were clearly unexpected and possibly led to prolonged internal discussions on the future course of action.

Ranchi: Court summons Rahul Gandhi for his defamatory remarks against Amit Shah

The petitioner submitted that the statement by Rahul Gandhi against Amit Shah had hurt his sentiments and tarnished the image of the party.
It is time for Congress and Gandhi Family mukt Bharat

Why Congress-mukt Bharat is still very much in progress

It is time BJP supporters understand the meaning of the term 'Congress-mukt Bharat'.

Can the BJP satisfy its online supporters? If only it were Congress

BJP supporters online, also known as the ‘right wing’, are first to attack the party and write it off after electoral setbacks.

BJP may be weaker than it was in 2014, but Congress is not as strong as projected either

If Congress has not forgotten the 1996 elections, they would very well know they are on a sticky wicket here.

Mayawati extends support to Congress for Madhya Pradesh, may consider Rajasthan ‘to keep BJP out of power’

She said to defeat BJP in Rajasthan, too, BSP will extend support to Congress.

Priyanka Gandhi part of selection process of Congress CM in the state where her husband faces probe

Priyanka Gandhi's husband, Robert Vadra, was recently summoned for the third time by the Enforcement Directorate in the Bikaner land deal money laundering case after he missed the first two.

Latest articles

Connect with us

125,598FansLike
97,697FollowersFollow
6,062SubscribersSubscribe

Don't miss these