SUPRESSION OF DISSENT

Prateek Tomar
BA0140081
1. ISSUE

How the majority government overpower the Voices of Dissent, which violates and hampers the
democracy and constitutional principles?

2. RESEARCH

J.S. Mill on liberty1

Mill in his book “On Liberty” talks about individual thought and freedom. In his book he says
even if there is one single person who has a contradicting opinion it would be illegitimate to
silence him, many believes that their reasoning is correct and in their own rightness they become
over-confident and because they have power they would misuse it and it will be arbitrary for the
minority.

Mill says that a person can be confident when he’s right which is only possible through
arguments and discussion, only when there is any contradicting opinion then one must prove it
wrong through his beliefs and arguments. As dissenting opinion also have the right to express
and their view can be correct. He gave four reasons for free speech and opposing censorship:

 A censored opinion may be true

 Even if it is literally false, it may contain an element of truth

 Even if it is completely false, challenging true opinions with other viewpoints prevents
them from being accepted dogmatically

 When an opinion goes unchallenged and becomes blind dogma, it loses its meaning

Mill truly believes that there is no limit to free speech and should be limited according to the
harm principle. Society needs to accept minority as a party of their society even if free will of the

1
J S Mill, On Liberty
people is made by the majority doesn’t give them right to oppress them and curtail them from
their liberty. As everybody’s opinion matters they can be true, where exchange of speech,
discussion, arguments and ideas will help society to develop and step out of being a conservative
society.

Precedent on Dissent

In KedarNath v. State of Bihar,2 the Supreme Court held that sedition is “stirring up of rebellion
against the government”. Here negative sentiments towards the government irrespective of the
fact whether any disturbance or outbreak was actually caused by such activities from the gist of
the offence of sedition. Article 19(1) (a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression to the
citizens of India and in case of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain3, SC held that Freedom of Speech
under Article 19(1) (a) not only ensures the right to freedom of speech and expression, but also
guarantees the citizens to know, the right to receive public information regarding public concern.

Public Policy is for the people and one cannot hamper it, anything which harms public policy is
the concern of the public and they have the right to know and oppose the same and powers like
‘big brother’ suppresses them and opinion of the dissents being oppressed by the higher
authority.

CONCLUSION

As dissent is the very essence of the democracy as in Hubli Conspiracy case 2008, many were
arrested from their house and illegally detained under UAPA and tortured. Finally without any
evidence they had to let them go. It was clearly the violation of Article 19(1) (a) and 21. What
the accused had in the possession was just Quran and everyone has right to follow their own faith
and religion. The majority government has oppressed voice of dissents and their opinions and not
granting right to dissent in curbing the very fabric of democracy and the submerging
constitution.

2
Kesar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, 1962 AIR 955.
3
Uttar Pardesh v. Raj Narain, AIR, 1975 SC865,864: (1975) 4 SCC 428.