.svg)
6
edits
Defence of India Act 1915: Difference between revisions
robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)
->TylerBurden (Reverting edit(s) by 197.157.147.4 (talk) to rev. 1065004220 by TylerBurden: Disruptive editing (RW 16.1)) |
(robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)) |
||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
===Preventive detention=== | ===Preventive detention=== | ||
The Bengal Regulation of 1812 and [[Bengal Regulation III of 1818|Regulation III of 1818]] were some of the earliest laws in British India to incorporate the provisions of [[Preventive detention]], without having to commit the detainee to trial.<ref name=Hindu> | The Bengal Regulation of 1812 and [[Bengal Regulation III of 1818|Regulation III of 1818]] were some of the earliest laws in British India to incorporate the provisions of [[Preventive detention]], without having to commit the detainee to trial.<ref name=Hindu>{{cite web |url=http://www.thehindu.com/op/2004/09/07/stories/2004090700101500.htm |title=Archived copy |website=www.thehindu.com |access-date=27 January 2022 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20150308120948/http://www.thehindu.com/op/2004/09/07/stories/2004090700101500.htm |archive-date=8 March 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref> In the Presidencies of [[Presidency of Madras|Madras]] and [[Bombay Presidency|Bombay]], similar laws had been enacted in 1819 and 1827 respectively.<ref name=V.B.Patel553>{{Harvnb|Patel|1995|p=532}}</ref> Prisoners under these regulations had no right of ''[[habeas corpus]]''.<ref name=Ghosh398>{{Harvnb|Ghosh|1995|p=398}}</ref> Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code introduced the writ of Habeas Corpus in 1882.<ref name=Ghosh398/> In 1907, emergency ordinances were issued in Punjab and in Eastern Bengal and Assam on the fiftieth anniversary of the 1857 mutiny. This allowed abolishment of public meetings, and the Indian press was subjected to controls to limit seditious material being published.<ref name=Riddick92/> The Explosive Substances Act and the Newspaper Act were passed in June 1908 to try and arrest agitation. | ||
In June 1907 local governments were further authorised to initiate proceedings against local press publishing seditious material amongst civilian population or the army.<ref name=Riddick92/> ''[[The Indian Sociologist]]'' was banned in India in September 1907 and in November that year the [[Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1907|Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act]] was passed.<ref name=Riddick93>{{Harvnb|Riddick|2006|p=93}}</ref> February 1910 saw the introduction of [[Press Act|Indian Press Act]] which allowed Provincial governments to ask for punitive securities of up to Rs 5,000 from newspapers likely to incite sedition and violence. This act resulted in a number of nationalist publications closing down unable to provide such a surety.<ref name=Riddick93/> | In June 1907 local governments were further authorised to initiate proceedings against local press publishing seditious material amongst civilian population or the army.<ref name=Riddick92/> ''[[The Indian Sociologist]]'' was banned in India in September 1907 and in November that year the [[Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1907|Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act]] was passed.<ref name=Riddick93>{{Harvnb|Riddick|2006|p=93}}</ref> February 1910 saw the introduction of [[Press Act|Indian Press Act]] which allowed Provincial governments to ask for punitive securities of up to Rs 5,000 from newspapers likely to incite sedition and violence. This act resulted in a number of nationalist publications closing down unable to provide such a surety.<ref name=Riddick93/> | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
==Defence of India act== | ==Defence of India act== | ||
On 19 March 1915, [[Sir Reginald Craddock]], home member in the Viceroy's council introduced the law and it passed in a single sitting. It was enacted as a temporary legislation in effect for the duration of World War I and for six months afterwards. The act gave the Governor General in Council the power to make rules {{ | On 19 March 1915, [[Sir Reginald Craddock]], home member in the Viceroy's council introduced the law and it passed in a single sitting. It was enacted as a temporary legislation in effect for the duration of World War I and for six months afterwards. The act gave the Governor General in Council the power to make rules {{blockquote|for the purpose of securing the public safety and the defence of British India and as to the powers and duties of public servants and other persons in furtherance of that purpose...}} | ||
Considerable pressure for the passage of the act was from [[Michael O'Dwyer]] particularly in light of the Ghadr threat. Answering to Sir [[Surendranath Bannerjee]] in the legislative assembly, Craddock denied any necessity or propriety for the government to constitute an advisory board of judicial character that would deal with the applications of the act.<ref name=Samaddara94>{{Harvnb|Samaddara|2007|p=94}}</ref> In this regard the law differed from the Defence of the Realm act. Craddock explained to the assembly that the lack of judicial oversight and advice were acceptable since the restrictive measures in the act were "preventive and not punitive in measures".<ref name=Samaddara94/> | Considerable pressure for the passage of the act was from [[Michael O'Dwyer]] particularly in light of the Ghadr threat. Answering to Sir [[Surendranath Bannerjee]] in the legislative assembly, Craddock denied any necessity or propriety for the government to constitute an advisory board of judicial character that would deal with the applications of the act.<ref name=Samaddara94>{{Harvnb|Samaddara|2007|p=94}}</ref> In this regard the law differed from the Defence of the Realm act. Craddock explained to the assembly that the lack of judicial oversight and advice were acceptable since the restrictive measures in the act were "preventive and not punitive in measures".<ref name=Samaddara94/> | ||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
===Moderate dissent=== | ===Moderate dissent=== | ||
The application of the act was not limited to those suspected of revolutionary crimes. It gradually came to be used in coercing and suppressing the voice of many nationalist leaders, even of moderate views, where regional administration felt their opinion or views were seditious to British rule in India, or dangerous to the administration.<ref name=Bates119>{{Harvnb|Bates|2007|p=119}}</ref> A number of prominent moderate leaders were interned or deported under the Defence of India act. Most notable of these leaders was Mrs [[Annie Besant]]. Beasant had set up branches of the [[Home Rule League]] in major towns and cities at the time [[Bal Gangadhar Tilak]] was establishing the league in Bombay and in Western India. Although these amounted to little more than debating societies (having been modelled on the [[Fabian Society|Fabian Societies]]), the leagues were noted to be publishing political pamphlets, selling alm ost 46000 of these in 1916. Libraries were also established where political treatises were made available. Beasant's league had 27000 members by 1917, and that same year both Tilak and Beasant were interned under the act on the grounds their activities were becoming subversive. India. [[Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar]] and [[Maulana Shaukat Ali]] were arrested and interned after they were found to have been in liaison with [[Niedermayer-Hentig expedition|individuals in Kabul]] linked to the German mission, which the administration suspected may have been to promulgate a pan-Indian Islamic revolution.<ref name=Bates119/> [[Abul Kalam Azad]] was deported from Bengal and placed under house arrest in Ranchi for his writing in ''[[Al Balagh]]''. | The application of the act was not limited to those suspected of revolutionary crimes. It gradually came to be used in coercing and suppressing the voice of many nationalist leaders, even of moderate views, where regional administration felt their opinion or views were seditious to British rule in India, or dangerous to the administration.<ref name=Bates119>{{Harvnb|Bates|2007|p=119}}</ref> A number of prominent moderate leaders were interned or deported under the Defence of India act. Most notable of these leaders was Mrs [[Annie Besant]]. Beasant had set up branches of the [[Home Rule League]] in major towns and cities at the time [[Bal Gangadhar Tilak]] was establishing the league in Bombay and in Western India. Although these amounted to little more than debating societies (having been modelled on the [[Fabian Society|Fabian Societies]]), the leagues were noted to be publishing political pamphlets, selling alm ost 46000 of these in 1916. Libraries were also established where political treatises were made available. Beasant's league had 27000 members by 1917, and that same year both Tilak and Beasant were interned under the act on the grounds their activities were becoming subversive. India. [[Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar]] and [[Maulana Shaukat Ali]] were arrested and interned after they were found to have been in liaison with [[Niedermayer-Hentig expedition|individuals in Kabul]] linked to the German mission, which the administration suspected may have been to promulgate a pan-Indian Islamic revolution.<ref name=Bates119/> [[Abul Kalam Azad]] was deported from Bengal and placed under house arrest in Ranchi for his writing in ''[[Al Balagh (newspaper)|Al Balagh]]''. | ||
===Post-WWI=== | ===Post-WWI=== | ||
| Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
| publisher = Routledge | | publisher = Routledge | ||
| isbn = 0-7146-4580-X | | isbn = 0-7146-4580-X | ||
}} | | access-date = 11 May 2015 | ||
| archive-date = 26 March 2009 | |||
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090326193437/http://www.routledge.com/shopping_cart/products/product_detail.asp?sku=&isbn=071464580X&parent_id=&pc= | |||
| url-status = dead | |||
}} | |||
* {{Citation | * {{Citation | ||
| surname1 = Riddick | | surname1 = Riddick | ||