In their view, a person ought to be able to speak on any issue he likes — if in doing so, he runs the risk of violating the law (questioning the "sensitive" provisions of the Constitution constitutes a crime under the Sedition Act), so be it.
In their perspective, a person should be able to express opinions on any matter without fear of repercussions — as long as there's a risk of breaking the law (challenging constitutionally sensitive provisions is a crime under the Sedition Act), so it's permissible.