'Who breaks a butterfly with a wheel?' That line from Alexander Pope's 1735 poem 'Epistle to Dr Arbuthnot' should be esoteric enough to not catch the eye of the 'usually suspicious'. The rhetorical question points to the use of excessive force or punishment for what is, at worst, a minor offence. Assam Police's dogged pursuit of journalists they deem to have committed seditious acts under Section 152 of BNS is a riveting example of a bad law being used selectively against 'usual suspects'.
This second FIR, following an earlier July 11 one by the same party ('in relation to the present investigation') that the Supreme Court had challenged on Aug 12, remains oddly outside public purview - oddly because the law requires FIRs to be made public, with copies shared with the accused. All this, ostensibly because of a June news report that quoted India's defence attache in Indonesia stating in a seminar about loss of IAF fighter jets during Op Sindoor, and accusing the news platform of publishing 'misleading' reports. Even if the report contained inaccuracies - and it had quoted the Indian embassy in Jakarta about the attache's comments being taken 'out of context' - how it 'excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India' is anybody's guess outside a police state.
The latest Aug 18 summons have demanded two journalists in the FIR appear at the crime branch office in Guwahati on Friday. No details of this second FIR being shared, by itself, is cause enough for the law on sedition to be junked. The danger doesn't apply only to BJP-ruled states like Assam, but also to non-BJP-ruled states where coteries also aspire to be more loyal than their king, or queen.
This second FIR, following an earlier July 11 one by the same party ('in relation to the present investigation') that the Supreme Court had challenged on Aug 12, remains oddly outside public purview - oddly because the law requires FIRs to be made public, with copies shared with the accused. All this, ostensibly because of a June news report that quoted India's defence attache in Indonesia stating in a seminar about loss of IAF fighter jets during Op Sindoor, and accusing the news platform of publishing 'misleading' reports. Even if the report contained inaccuracies - and it had quoted the Indian embassy in Jakarta about the attache's comments being taken 'out of context' - how it 'excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India' is anybody's guess outside a police state.
The latest Aug 18 summons have demanded two journalists in the FIR appear at the crime branch office in Guwahati on Friday. No details of this second FIR being shared, by itself, is cause enough for the law on sedition to be junked. The danger doesn't apply only to BJP-ruled states like Assam, but also to non-BJP-ruled states where coteries also aspire to be more loyal than their king, or queen.
