Sedition

This article is about the legal term. For other uses, seeSedition (disambiguation).

Not to be confused withsedation.

"Seditionist" redirects here. For the early 20th century Mexican-American rebel organization, seePlan of San Diego.

Seditionis overt conduct, such asspeechororganization,that tends towardrebellionagainst the established order. Sedition often includessubversionof aconstitutionandincitementof discontent toward, orinsurrectionagainst, established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing areseditious libel.Aseditionistis one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition.

Because sedition is overt, it is typically not considered a subversive act, and theovert actsthat may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary by jurisdiction.

Roman origin

In the laterRoman Republic,seditio(lit. 'going apart') referred to the offence of collective disobedience toward amagistrate,which included both militarymutinyand civilian mob action. Leading or instigatingseditiowaspunishable by death.Civilseditiobecame frequent during thepolitical crisisof the first century BCE, aspopulist politicianssought to check the privileged classes by appealing topublic assemblies.TheJulio-Claudian emperorsaddressed this situation by abolishingelectionsand other duties of the assemblies. UnderTiberiusthe crime ofseditiowas subsumed in thelaw ofmajestas,which prohibited any utterance against the dignity of the emperor.

Seditiohas often been proposed as the offence for whichJesuswascrucified,as described inLuke 23:14:"inciting the people to rebellion" (Greek:ἀποστρέφοντα τὸν λαόν,"leading the people astray" ).

History in common law jurisdictions

The termseditionin its modern meaning first appeared in theElizabethan Era(c. 1590) as the "notion of inciting by words or writings disaffection towards the state or constituted authority".The law developed in the Court ofStar Chamber,relying on longstandingscandalum magnatumstatutes and a broad repressive act ofMary Iagainst literature that contained "the encouraging, stirring or moving of any insurrection". That seditious statements were true was no defence, but rather an aggravating factor, since true statements were all the more potent.After the Star Chamber's dissolution, enforcement continued in thecourts of assizeandquarter sessions.

Three classes of seditious offence were commonly charged: "seditious words" manifested by speaking, "seditious libel"by writing or publishing, and"seditious conspiracy"by active plotting.Although England adopted the name of the offence from Roman-derived civil law, it did not rely on the jurisprudence.

Australia

Main article:Australian sedition law

Australia's sedition laws were amended inanti-terrorism legislationpassed on 6 December 2005, updating definitions and increasing penalties.

In late 2006, the Commonwealth Government, under the Prime-Ministership ofJohn Howardproposed plans to amend Australia'sCrimes Act 1914,introducing laws that meant artists and writers may be jailed for up to seven years if their work was considered seditious or inspired sedition either deliberately or accidentally.Opponents of these laws have suggested that they could be used against dissent that may be seen as legitimate.

In 2006, the then Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock had rejected calls by two reports—from aSenatecommittee and theAustralian Law Reform Commission—to limit the sedition provisions in theAnti-Terrorism Act 2005by requiring proof of intention to cause disaffection or violence. He had also brushed aside recommendations to curtail new clauses outlawing "urging conduct" that "assists" an "organization or country engaged in armed hostilities" against theAustralian military.

These laws were amended in Australia on 19 September 2011. The 'sedition' clauses were repealed and replaced with 'urging violence'.

Canada

In Canada, sedition, which includes speaking seditious words, publishing a seditious libel, and being party to a seditious conspiracy, is an indictable offense, for which the maximum punishment is of fourteen years' imprisonment. For military personnel, Section 82 of the National Defence Act cites Seditious Offences as advocating governmental change by force, punishable by imprisonment for life or to less. Service offences up to two years imprisonment are served in aMilitary prison,followed by transfer to a penitentiary for the remainder of the sentence.

During World War II,Camillien Houdecampaigned against conscription. On 2 August 1940, Houde publicly urged the men of Quebec to ignore the national registration measure introduced by the federal government.Three days later, he was placed under arrest by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on charges of sedition, and then confined without trial in internment camps in Petawawa, Ontario and Ripples, New Brunswick until 1944.Upon his release on 18 August 1944, he was greeted by a cheering crowd of 50,000 Montrealers, and won back his job as Montreal mayor in 1944's civic election.

Hong Kong

A Sedition Ordinance had existed in the territory since 1970, which was subsequently consolidated into theCrimes Ordinancein 1972.According to the Crimes Ordinance, a seditious intention is an intention to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the person of government, to excite inhabitants of Hong Kong to attempt to procure the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any other matter in Hong Kong as by law established, to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Hong Kong, to raise discontent or disaffection amongst inhabitants of Hong Kong, to promote feelings of ill-will and enmity between different classes of the population of Hong Kong, to incite persons to violence, or to counsel disobedience to law or to any lawful order.Sedition is punishable by a fine of HK$5,000 and imprisonment for 2 years, and further offences are punishable by imprisonment for 3 years.

Article 23of theBasic Lawrequires thespecial administrative regionto enact laws prohibiting any act that be said of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against theCentral People's Governmentof thePeople's Republic of China.The National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill was tabled in early 2003 to replace the existing laws regarding treason and sedition, and to introduce new laws to prohibit secessionist and subversive acts and theft of state secrets, and to prohibit political organizations from establishing overseas ties. The bill was shelved following massive opposition from the public.

TheNational Security Law,enacted on 30 June 2020, contains articles prohibiting secession and subversion against the Central Government and the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Both charges may carry penalty up to life imprisonment. Notably, Hong Kong's National Security Law was drafted by theStanding Committee of the National People's Congress,and passed by the National People's Congress, as part of the Annex III theBasic Law.This law was written in Mainland China's civil law as opposed to Hong Kong's common law traditions.

India

Main article:Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code

In 2003, theVishva Hindu Parishald (VHP)general secretary,Praveen Togadia,was sought to be charged with sedition for allegedly waging a war against the elected government and taking part in anti-national activity.

In 2010, writerArundhati Roywas sought to be charged with sedition for her comments onKashmirandMaoists.Two individuals have been charged with sedition since 2007.Binayak Sen,an Indian doctor and public health specialist, and activist was found guilty of sedition.He is national Vice-President of thePeople's Union for Civil Liberties(PUCL). On 24 December 2010, the Additional Sessions and District Court Judge B.P Varma Raipur found Binayak Sen,NaxalideologueNarayan Sanyaland Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha, guilty of sedition for helping the Maoists in their fight against the state. They were sentenced to life imprisonment, but he got bail in Supreme Court on 16 April 2011.

On 10 September 2012,Aseem Trivedi,apolitical cartoonist,was sent to judicial custody till 24 September 2012 on charges of sedition over a series of cartoons againstcorruption.Trivedi was accused of uploading "ugly and obscene" content to his website, also accused of insulting the Constitution during ananti-corruption protestin Mumbai in 2011. Trivedi's arrest under sedition has been heavily criticised in India. The Press Council of India termed it a "stupid" move.

In February 2016,JNU student unionpresidentKanhaiya Kumarwas arrested on charges of Sedition & raising voice for theTukde Tukde Gangunder section 124-A ofIndian Penal Code(which was part of the sedition laws implemented by the British Rule). His arrest raised political turmoil in the country with academicians and activists marching and protesting against this move by the government. He was released on interim bail on 2 March 2016 for a lack of conclusive evidence.On 13 January 2019, The Delhi Police filed a chargesheet on Monday against former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union (JNUSU) president Kanhaiya Kumar and others in a sedition case lodged in 2016.

On 17 August 2016,Amnesty InternationalIndia was booked in a case of "sedition" and "promoting enmity" by Bengaluru police. A complaint was filed by ABVP, an all India student organization affiliated to the Hindu NationalistRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

In September 2018,Divya Spandana,theCongressSocial Media chief was booked for sedition for callingNarendra Modi,theprime minister of India,a thief.

On 10 January 2019, a sedition case was registered suo-motto againstHiren Gohainand two others for their remarks against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill. Gohain called the move "a desperate attempt by a cornered government".

On February 13, 2020, a sedition case was registered againstDisha Raviaclimate activist,by theDelhi Policefor allegedly trying to incite perpetuate violence and defame India with regards to her support of thefarmers protest.

A sedition case was filed againstShashi Tharoor,journalistRajdeep Sardesaiand 5 other journalists by Noida Police for allegedly instigating violence and spreading misinformation over a series of tweets during the violence from atractor rallyon republic day on 26 January in New Delhi.

As of May 2022, Supreme Court of India has put sedition law on hold and ordered the government to not book further cases under the same.

Ireland

Article 40.6.1° (i) of the 1937Constitution of Irelandguaranteed the right tofreedom of expression,subject to several constraints, among them:

The publication or utterance of seditious or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.

Advocates for freedom of speech have argued that this constraint ought to be removed;anyconstitutional amendmentrequires areferendum.Thethirty-seventh amendmentof the constitution removed the offence of blasphemy.

Thelaw of the Republic of Irelandsince the 1922 independence of theIrish Free Stateinherited earliercommon lawprinciples based onEnglish law.The crime of seditious libel was presumed to persist, although last prosecuted in 1901.After the common law offence ofblasphemous libelwas ruled in 1999 to be incompatible with the constitution's guarantee offreedom of speech,jurists argued that seditious libel was similarly unconstitutional.Both blasphemous libel and seditious libel were abolished by the Defamation Act 2009, which also created new crime of "publication or utterance of blasphemous matter"to fulfil the constitutional requirement with regard to blasphemy.No new offence was created for sedition in 2009;this was in line with the recommendations of a 1991 consultation paper onlibelby theLaw Reform Commission(LRC) on the basis that several statutes define offences which are tantamount to sedition.

TheOffences against the State Act 1939created the offences of making, distributing, and possessing a "seditious document".The LRC suggests that "sedition", left undefined by the constitution, might be implicitly defined by the 1939 act's definition of a "seditious document" as one:

1. consisting of or containing matter calculated or tending to undermine the public order or the authority of the State, or
2. which alleges, implies, or suggests or is calculated to suggest that the government functioning under the Constitution is not the lawful government of the State or that there is in existence in the State any body or organization not functioning under the Constitution which is entitled to be recognised as being the government of the country, or
3. which alleges, implies, or suggests or is calculated to suggest that the military forces maintained under the Constitution are not the lawful military forces of the State, or that there is in existence in the State a body or organization not established and maintained by virtue of the Constitution which is entitled to be recognised as a military force, or
4. in which words, abbreviations, or symbols referable to a military body are used in referring to an unlawful organization

These provisions were largely aimed atIrish republican legitimatistswho believed the 1922 Free State was a usurpation of theIrish Republicproclaimedin 1916and againin 1919.The fourth provision made the use of the names "Irish Republican Army"and"Óglaigh na hÉireann"seditious as they were regarded as rightfully used by theIrish Defense Forces.The LRC notes that advocating violence is not essential for a document to be seditious.

The LRC also notes that Section 1A of the Broadcasting Authority Act 1960 (inserted in 1976) prohibited broadcasting of "anything which may reasonably be regarded as being likely to promote, or incite to, crime or as tending to undermine the authority of the State".The 1960 act has since been replaced by theBroadcasting Act 2009,section 39 of which obliges broadcaster not to broadcast "anything which may reasonably be regarded as causing harm or offense, or as being likely to promote, or incite to, crime or as tending to undermine the authority of the State".

Malaysia

Main article:Sedition Act (Malaysia)

Mauritius

The sedition law is based on Article 283 of the Criminal Code which was enacted in 1838.

New Zealand

Sedition charges were not uncommon inNew Zealandearly in the 20th century.For instance, the futurePrime MinisterPeter Fraserhad been convicted of sedition in his youth for arguing against conscription during World War I, and was imprisoned for a year. Perhaps ironically, Fraser re-introduced theconscriptionof troops as the Prime Minister during World War II.

In New Zealand's first sedition trial in decades,Tim Selwynwas convicted of sedition (section 83 of theCrimes Act 1961) on 8 June 2006. Shortly after, in September 2006, the New Zealand Police laid a sedition charge against aRotoruayouth, who was also charged with threatening to kill.The police withdrew the sedition charge when the youth agreed to plead guilty on the other charge.

In March 2007, Mark Paul Deason, the manager of a tavern near theUniversity of Otago,was charged with seditious intentalthough he was later granteddiversionwhen he pleaded guilty to publishing a document which encourages public disorder.Deason ran a promotion for his tavern that offered one litre of beer for one litre of petrol where at the end of the promotion, the prize would have been a couch soaked in the petrol. It is presumed the intent was for the couch to be burned—a popular university student prank. Police also applied for Deason's liquor license to be revoked.

Following a recommendation from theNew Zealand Law Commission,the New Zealand government announced on 7 May 2007 that the sedition law would be repealed.TheCrimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Act 2007was passed on 24 October 2007, and entered into force on 1 January 2008.

Russell Campbell made a documentary regarding conscientious objectors in New Zealand calledSedition.

Singapore

Main article:Sedition Act (Singapore)

United Kingdom

See also:Sedition Act 1661

Sedition was acommon law offencein the UK.James Fitzjames Stephen's "Digest of the Criminal Law" stated that:

... a seditious intention is an intention to bring into hatred or contempt, or to excite disaffection against the person of His Majesty, his heirs or successors, or the government andconstitution of the United Kingdom,as by law established, or either House of Parliament, or the administration of justice, or to excite His Majesty's subjects to attempt otherwise than by lawful means, the alteration of any matter in Church or State by law established, or to incite any person to commit any crime in disturbance of the peace, or to raise discontent or disaffection amongst His Majesty's subjects, or to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different classes of such subjects. An intention to show that His Majesty has been misled or mistaken in his measures, or to point out errors or defects in the government or constitution as by law established, with a view to their reformation, or to excite His Majesty's subjects to attempt by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Church or State by law established, or to point out, in order to secure their removal, matters which are producing, or have a tendency to produce, feelings of hatred and ill-will between classes of His Majesty's subjects, is not a seditious intention.

Stephen in hisHistory of the Criminal Law of Englandaccepted the view that aseditious libelwas nothing short of a direct incitement to disorder and violence. He stated that the modern view of the law was plainly and fully set out by Littledale J. inCollins.In that case the jury were instructed that they could convict of seditious libel only if they were satisfied that the defendant "meant that the people should make use of physical force as their own resource to obtain justice, and meant to excite the people to take the power in to their own hands, and meant to excite them to tumult and disorder".

The last prosecution for sedition in the United Kingdom was in 1972, when three people were charged with seditious conspiracy and uttering seditious words for attempting to recruit people to travel toNorthern Irelandto fight in support of Republicans. The seditious conspiracy charge was dropped, but the men received suspended sentences for uttering seditious words and for offences against thePublic Order Act 1936.

In 1977, aLaw Commissionworking paperrecommended that the common law offence of sedition in England and Wales be abolished. They said that they thought that this offence was redundant and that it was not necessary to have any offence of sedition.However this proposal was not implemented until 2009, when sedition and seditious libel (as common law offences) were abolished in England and Wales and in Northern Ireland by section 73 of theCoroners and Justice Act 2009,with effect from 12 January 2010.

In Scotland, section 51 of theCriminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010abolished the common law offences of sedition andleasing-makingwith effect from 28 March 2011.

Sedition by analienis still an offence under section 3 of theAliens Restriction (Amendment) Act 1919,punishable by up to three months of imprisonment if convicted summarily, or up to ten years of imprisonment if convicted on indictment.

United States

See also:Seditious conspiracy

Civilian

The charge of seditious libel for true statements was weakened, but not abolished, in the 1735New Yorkcase ofCrown v.John Peter Zenger.Zenger had published attacks on GovernorWilliam Cosbythat were well received in the province. The Attorney General charged him bycriminal information,bypassing the grand jury process, and Zenger was acquitted by a trial jury.

PresidentJohn Adamssigned into law theSedition Act of 1798,which set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment for "opposing or resisting any law of the United States" or writing or publishing "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about thePresidentor theU.S. Congress(though not the office of theVice-President,then occupied by Adams' political opponentThomas Jefferson). This Act of Congress was allowed to expire in 1801 after Jefferson's election to the Presidency;Jefferson pardoned those still serving sentences, and fines were repaid by the government. This law was never appealed to the United States Supreme Court (which had not yet established its power to invalidate laws passed by Congress granted inMarbury v. Madison) but opponents claimed it was unconstitutional under theFirst Amendment.

Political cartoon byArt Young,The Masses,1917

In theEspionage Act of 1917,Section 3 made it a federal crime, punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to willfully spread false news of theUnited States ArmyorNavywith an intent to disrupt its operations, to fomentmutinyin their ranks, or to obstruct recruiting. This Act of Congress was amended by theSedition Act of 1918,which expanded the scope of the Espionage Act to any statement criticizing theGovernment of the United States.These laws were upheld by the Supreme Court in the 1919 decisionsSchenck v. United States(concerning distribution of flyers urging men to resist the draft) andAbrams v. United States(concerning leaflets urging cessation of weapons production). Schenck led to the "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater"explanation of the limits offree speech.The laws were largely repealed in 1921, leaving laws forbidding foreignespionagein the United States and allowing militarycensorshipof sensitive material.

In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or "Smith Act",was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing theUnited States Government,or to be a member of any organization which does the same. It was often used againstcommunist partyorganizations. This Act was invoked in three major cases, one of which against theSocialist Worker's PartyinMinneapolisin 1941, resulting in 23 convictions, and again in what became known as theGreat Sedition Trial of 1944in which a number of pro-Nazifigures were indicted but released when the prosecution ended in amistrial.Also, a series of trials of 140 leaders of theCommunist Party USAalso relied upon the terms of the "Smith Act" —beginning in 1949—and lasting until 1957. Although theU.S. Supreme Courtupheld the convictions of 11 CPUSA leaders in 1951 inDennis v. United States,that same Court reversed itself in 1957 in the case ofYates v. United States,by ruling that teaching an ideal, no matter how harmful it may seem, does not equal advocating or planning its implementation. Although unused since at least 1961,the "Smith Act" remains a federal law.

There was, however, a brief attempt to use the sedition laws, as defined by theSedition Act of 1918amendments to the Espionage Act of 1917, after socialist leagues in America distributed leaflets calling for resisting the draft. Those amendments were deemed incompatible with freedom of speech under American law, in spite of the exceptional circumstances that led to those laws, againstprotesters of the Vietnam War.On 17 October 1967, two demonstrators, while engaged in asit-inat the Army Induction Center inOakland, California,were arrested and charged with sedition by a deputy U.S. Marshal. U.S. AttorneyCecil Poolechanged the charge to trespassing. Poole said, "three guys reaching up and touching the leg of an inductee, and that's conspiracy to commit sedition? That's ridiculous!" The marshals were in the process of stepping on the demonstrators as they attempted to enter the building, and the demonstrators were trying to protect themselves from the marshals' feet. Attorney Poole later added, "We'll decide what to prosecute, not marshals."This decision drew the ire of California SenatorGeorge Murphy,who would later block Poole's confirmation to a federal judgeship in response.

In 1981,Oscar López Rivera,aPuerto Rican nationalistand Vietnam War veteran, was convicted and sentenced to 70 years in prison for seditious conspiracy (among other offenses) for his involvement inFALN- aPuerto Rican independencegroup that carried out over 130 bombings in the United States. Rivera was tried for being a recruiter and bomb-making trainer.In 1999, he was among the 16 Puerto Rican nationalists offered conditional clemency by U.S. PresidentBill Clintonin 1999, but he rejected the offer.Then-Congressman, nowGovernor of Puerto RicoPedro Pierluisistated that "the primary reason that López Rivera did not accept the clemency offer extended to him in 1999 was because it had not also been extended to certain fellow Puerto Rico independence movement prisoners, including Mr.(Carlos Alberto) Torres".Torres was released from prison in July 2010. In January 2017, PresidentBarack Obamacommuted López Rivera's sentence; he was released May 2017, having served 36 years in prison.

In 1987,fourteen white supremacistswere indicted by a federal grand jury for seditious conspiracy between July 1983 and March 1985.Some alleged conspirators were serving time for overt acts, such as the crimes committed byThe Order- bank robbery and the assassination ofAlan Berg.Others, such asLouis BeamandRichard Butler,were charged for their speech seen as spurring on the overt acts by the others. In April 1988, a federal jury in Arkansas acquitted all the accused of charges of seditious conspiracy.Some still had to serve lengthy prison sentences on other charges, albeit one of the witnesses at the trial,Frazier Glenn Miller Jr.,would laterkill three people in shootings at Jewish community centersin 2014.

On 1 October 1995,Omar Abdel-Rahmanand nine others were convicted ofseditious conspiracyafter the1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Laura Berg, a nurse at aU.S. Department of Veterans Affairshospital inNew Mexico,was investigated for sedition in September 2005 after writing a letter to the editor of a local newspaper, accusing several national leaders of criminal negligence.Though their action was later deemed unwarranted by the director of Veteran Affairs, local human resources personnel took it upon themselves to request anFBIinvestigation. Ms. Berg was represented by theACLU.Charges were dropped in 2006.

On 28 March 2010, nine members of theHutareeChristian Patriotmilitia were arrested and charged with crimes including seditious conspiracy.In August 2012, U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts dismissed all serious charges against the remaining defendants, including sedition, and rebuked prosecutors for bringing the case. One man, Jacob Ward, was found not competent to stand trial. Three of the men, Joshua John Clough, David Brian Stone Sr., the leader of the group, and his son Joshua Stone, pleaded guilty to weapons charges.

On 13 January 2022, eleven members or associates of the militia groupOath Keepers,including founderStewart Rhodes,were charged with seditious conspiracy for their involvement with theJanuary 6 United States Capitol attack.In 2022, three of the charged Oath Keepers pled guilty to the crime, becoming the first convictions since 1995.On 29 November 2022,Rhodes,after pleading not guilty in January 2022, was convicted of seditious conspiracy, becoming the first person convicted by a jury of the crime in 27 years.On 23 January 2023, four additional Oath Keepers were found guilty.

On 6 June, 2022, five members or associates of the militia groupProud Boys,including the former chairman,Enrique Tarrio,were indicted for seditious conspiracy for their involvement in theJanuary 6 United States Capitol attack.

Military

Sedition is a punishable offense under Article 94 of theUniform Code of Military Justice.

Civil law jurisdictions

Germany

Volksverhetzung( "incitement of the people" ) is a legal concept in Germany and some Nordic countries. It is sometimes loosely translated as sedition,although the law bans the incitement of hatred against a segment of the population such as a particular race or religion.

Spain

After the2017–18 Spanish constitutional crisissome of the leaders of theCatalan independence movementwere charged with several criminal offences, notablyrebellionand sedition. An offence similar to the Spanishoffenceof rebellion did not exist in Germany and theEuropean Arrest WarrantagainstCarles Puigdemontwas withdrawn, allowing him to remain in Belgium. Other leaders who were convicted of sedition received 9–13 years in prison as established in theSpanish Penal Codeby a unanimous sentence of the Spanish Supreme Court during the October 2019 trial..

In 2022, it was removed from theSpanish Criminal Code,being replaced with the new lesser-sentence "aggravated public disorder" offense.

See also

• Coup d'état
• Criminal anarchy
• Fifth column
• Free speech
• Guerrilla warfare
• Kangaroo court
• Political repression
• Propaganda
• Revolution
• Sabotage
• Sedition Act (disambiguation)
• Sedition Caucus
• Treason

References

Sources

• "Consultation Paper on The Crime of Libel".Dublin: Law Reform Commission. August 1991.Retrieved11 May2016.

Further reading

• Breight, Curtis, C.Surveillance, militarism and drama in the Elizabethan Era,Macmillan 1996: London.
• "A synopsis of the Australian sedition laws"(PDF).Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 31 October 2005.

External links

• The dictionary definition ofseditionat Wiktionary
• Quotations related toSeditionat Wikiquote