28.4 C
Delhi
Saturday, April 4, 2020

COVID 2019 India Stats (Source: MohFW) 04 April 2020, 18:00

2784
Active Cases
212
Cured / Discharged
75
Deaths

Kashmir verdict: SC cites US laws on free speech during wars

Today's Latest

[Hindi] 20 करोड़ महिलाओं के खाते में मोदी सरकार ने भेजा पैसा

नई दिल्ली। लॉकडाउन के कारण आर्थिक मुश्किलों का सामना कर रहीं गरीब महिलाओं के खाते में मोदी सरकार ने...

भारत में 50 डॉक्टर व चिकित्साकर्मी कोरोना वायरस से पॉजिटिव

नई दिल्ली: भारत में अभी तक लगभग 50 डॉक्टर और चिकित्सा कर्मचारी कोरोनावायरस (Corona Virus) की चपेट में आ...

Gathering of migrant workers, Tablighi Jamaat causes setback: President

New Delhi, April 4 (IANS) In his second unpresidented communication with all Governors, Lieutenant Governors (LGs) and Administrators, President...

Popular Today

YRF come forward to support Bollywood wage earners

Mumbai, April 4 (IANS) One of Bollywood''s most powerful production houses, Yash Raj Films (YRF), has pledged to support...

AI can predict corona patients’ risk if they need ventilators

London, April 4 (IANS) As companies the world over commit to make ventilators to meet the demand, researchers are...

[Hindi] 20 करोड़ महिलाओं के खाते में मोदी सरकार ने भेजा पैसा

नई दिल्ली। लॉकडाउन के कारण आर्थिक मुश्किलों का सामना कर रहीं गरीब महिलाओं के खाते में मोदी सरकार ने...
India Updates
India Updates is an independent news & Information website. Follow us for regular updates on News and Information.

91% of Kashmir open for traffic: Indian envoy to USNew Delhi, Jan 11 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Friday noted that the US has undergone lot of changes concerning dissent during war, and the position that emerges is that “any speech which incites imminent violence does not enjoy constitutional protection”.

A bench, headed by Justice N.V. Ramana, while examining the restrictions imposed on freedom of speech and expression in the Indian context, cited the US Civil War, when a dramatic confrontation over free speech arose with respect to the speech of Clement L. Vallandigham, who gave a speech calling the conflict “wicked, cruel and unnecessary”.

- Advertisement -

“He had urged the citizens to use ballot boxes to hurl ”President (Abraham) Lincoln” from his throne. As a reaction, Union soldiers arrested Vallandigham and he faced a five member military commission which charged him with “declaring disloyal sentiments and opinions with the object and purpose of weakening the power of the government in its efforts to suppress an unlawful rebellion.

The Commission found Vallandigham guilty and imposed imprisonment on him during the war. This led to demonstrations terming it as a crime against the US Constitution, it said.

“President Lincoln, having regard to the US Constitution, commuted the imprisonment and converted it to banishment. He justified the aforesaid act by stating that banishment was more humane and less disagreeable means of securing least restrictive measures,” the court said.

The apex court also cited the Cold War era, where the attention of the American Congress was on the increasing communism. In 1954, the Congress even enacted the Communist Control Act, which stripped the Communist Party of all rights, privileges and and immunities. The Act made it unlawful for any person to knowingly or willfully advocate the intent of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States by force or violence, to organise or help to organise any group which does so, or to conspire to do so.

“An analysis of the leading cases in this Court which have involved direct limitations on speech, however, will demonstrate that both the majority of the Court and the dissenters in particular cases have recognized that this is not an unlimited, unqualified right, but that the societal value of speech must, on occasion, be subordinated to other values and considerations,” the apex court cited the US Supreme Court as saying.

During the Vietnam War, the US Supreme Court held that the state cannot punish advocacy of unlawful conduct, unless it is intended to incite and is likely to incite imminent lawless action. The bench also cited an article by Bruce Ackerman, while the US was facing new challenges, especially with war on terror. “The selective adaptation of doctrines dealing with war predictably leads to sweeping incursions on fundamental liberties,” the verdict said.

The apex court said: “From the aforesaid study of the precedents and facts, we may note that the law in the US has undergone lot of changes concerning dissent during war. The position that emerges is that any speech which incites imminent violence does not enjoy constitutional protection”.

The Supreme Court, which has asked the Jammu and Kashmir to review all curb orders within a week, said: “We may note that even the broadest guarantee of free speech would not protect the entire gamut of speech. The question which begs to be answered is whether there exists a clear and present danger in restricting such expression.”

–IANS

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Must Read

Social media messages about emergency are fake, says Indian Army

New Delhi, Mar 30 (PTI) The Indian Army on Monday dismissed as "fake" certain messages circulating on social media...

भारत में 50 डॉक्टर व चिकित्साकर्मी कोरोना वायरस से पॉजिटिव

नई दिल्ली: भारत में अभी तक लगभग 50 डॉक्टर और चिकित्सा कर्मचारी कोरोनावायरस (Corona Virus) की चपेट में आ चुके हैं. यह जानकारी शुक्रवार...

Corporate leaders face economic challenge of a lifetime

New Delhi, April 4 (IANS) As the new coronavirus pandemic hits enterprises and individuals alike -- businesses large and small shut their doors and...

COVID-19: National leg cricket league indefinitely postponed

New Delhi, April 4 (IANS) Leg cricket is an emerging sport that has made its mark with young athletes all over India. While it...

AI can predict corona patients’ risk if they need ventilators

London, April 4 (IANS) As companies the world over commit to make ventilators to meet the demand, researchers are now developing computer models based...

More Articles Like This