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

Unsustainable growth
Updated 23 Jun, 2026

Unsustainable growth

CLICHÉS are an essential part of political rhetoric. But when repeated often, they lose their impact. So when...
Banned speeches
23 Jun, 2026

Banned speeches

NATIONAL Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq on Sunday formally lifted long-standing restrictions on the airing of ...
New GB government
23 Jun, 2026

New GB government

WITH the newly elected lawmakers of the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly taking oath on Monday, the PPP looks set to head...
A costly cut
Updated 22 Jun, 2026

A costly cut

Climate risks are increasing and public investment should reflect that reality.
Guarded access
22 Jun, 2026

Guarded access

ONE of the government’s ‘novel’ proposals to snag tax evaders has collided with some harsh realities. On...
Lyari’s passion
22 Jun, 2026

Lyari’s passion

THE love for football in Lyari knows no bounds. The World Cup might be underway thousands of miles away in North...