Concerns Over Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

Background and Context

Before the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Supreme Court suspended criminal trials under Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 2022, following a promise by the Union Home Minister to repeal sedition as an offense. The Rajasthan High Court recently cautioned against using Section 152 of the BNS to stifle legitimate dissent.

Provisions of Section 152

• Criminalization: Section 152 criminalizes acts exciting secession, armed rebellion, and subversive activities, as well as acts encouraging separatism or threatening the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.
• Vague Definitions: The statute lacks a clear definition of what constitutes endangerment of sovereignty, unity, and integrity, leaving it open to abuse and broad interpretation.
• Lower Threshold: The term ‘knowingly’ reduces the threshold for offenses, making individuals liable even without malicious intent if their actions could potentially provoke prohibited activities or feelings.
• Non-Bailable Offense: Section 152 is both cognizable and non-bailable, increasing the risk of arbitrary arrests.

Potential for Abuse and Free Speech Concerns

• Data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) shows that out of 548 arrests under Section 124A between 2015 and 2020, only 12 led to convictions, highlighting the potential for misuse.
• The lack of safeguards in Section 152 may result in a chilling effect on free speech, similar to the issues seen under Section 124A.

Judicial Interpretation and Guidelines

• Previous judgments, such as Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995) and Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), emphasize the need for a direct causal link between speech and its impact to classify it as an offense.
• It is crucial for the Supreme Court to craft guidelines for enforcement authorities to prevent Section 152 from becoming a proxy for the offense of sedition.

Importance of Free Speech

The concept of a ‘marketplace of ideas’ should be upheld, allowing for diverse thoughts and expressions to be freely criticized and debated within a democratic society.

Meta’s Shift from Third-Party Fact-Checking to Community Notes

Meta has decided to discontinue its third-party fact-checking program in the US, transitioning to a system of user-generated community notes to verify content. This shift raises concerns about potential increases in misinformation and disinformation on Meta platforms like Facebook and Instagram.

Community Notes System

• Origin: Popularized by Elon Musk. 
• Functionality: Operates through contributors who evaluate and rate content accuracy based on various parameters. 
• Criticism: Lacks the depth and rigor of professional fact-checking, which may affect the quality of information. 

Expert Opinions and Concerns

• Emphasizes an increase in conflict and authoritarianism that feeds on disinformation, generating unwarranted fears. 
• Highlights the potential negative impact on users seeking accurate information for daily decision-making. 
  • Fact-checkers adhere to a Code of Principles emphasizing non-partisanship and transparency.

Potential Impact on India

• Current Status: Meta collaborates with nearly a dozen fact-checking companies in India for content verification on platforms like Facebook and Instagram. 
• Future Concerns: Experts fear the removal of professional fact-checkers in India could have more severe consequences.