Draw the line - Hate Speech .vs. Free Speech
To draw the red lines of what is politically acceptable, and what is not, in a diverse democracy. If it doesn't, it will send another signal to the lumpen within that they can get away — even if they call for murder.
Uttrakhand police has registered an FIR regarding religious event in Haridwar where calls were made for violence against Muslims under Section 153A of IPC with the videos of alleged hate speech against minorities having sparked a major row.
HATE SPEECH
- It is an expression likely to cause distress of and other individuals on the basis of their association with the particular group or inside hostility towards them
- There is no general legal definition of hate speech perhaps for the apprehension that setting a standard for determining unwarranted speech may lead to suppression of this Liberty
Constitutional principles
- Article 21: responsible speech is the essence of Liberty granted under article 21 of the constitution, one of greatest challenges before principle of autonomy and free speech is to ensure that Liberty is not exercised to the detriment of any individual or disadvantaged sections of the society especially in a diverse country like India
- Article 19(2): guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all citizens of India what is subject to certain restrictions-
- Sovereignty and integrity of India
- Security of the state
- Friendly relations with foreign States
- Public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court
- Defamation or incitement to an offence
Legislations around hate speech
Indian Penal Code (IPC)
- Section 124A penalises sedition
- Section 153A penalizes promotion of enmity between different groups on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth, language etc and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony
- Section 295A penalizes deliberate and Malaysia sax intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs
- Section 298 analyses uttering words etc with deliberate intent to go in the religious feelings of any person
- Section 505 (1) & (2) penalises publication of circulation of any statement, rumour aur report causing public mischief and enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes
Representation of People Act, 1951
- Section 8 disqualify is a person from contesting election if he or she is convicted for indulging in acts amounting to instrument instrument legitimate use of freedom of speech and expression
Protection of Civil Rights Act,1955
- Section 7 penalizes inside payment to and encouragement of untouchability through words, idhar spoken or written or by science or by visible representations or otherwise
The code of criminal procedure (CrPC), 1973
- Section 95 empowers the state government 24 ft publications that are punishable under sections 124A, 153A, 153B, 292, 293 or 295A of IPC
- Section 107 powers executive magistrate to prevent a person from committing a breach of peace for disturb the public tranquility or do any wrongful act that may probably cause breach of peace order stop the public tranquility
- Section 144 empowers the district magistrate to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger.
SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS
Brij Bhushan vs. State of Delhi (1950)
- The court opened that public order was allowed to public safety and considered equivalent to security of the state. The interpretation was validated by the first constitutional amendment inserting public order as a ground for restriction under Article 19(2)
Ram Manohar Lohiya vs. State of Bihar (1965)
- The supreme court distinguished law and order, public order and security of the state from each other
- The standard applied for restricting article 19(1)(a) is the highest when imposed in the interest of security of state
Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015)
- The court declared section 66a of information technology act as invalid as it did not establish any proximate relationship between the instructions and the act
- The court also differentiated between discussion and advocacy from inside mint and held that first to were the essence of article 19(1)
Arup Bhuyan vs. state of Assam (2011)
- The supreme court declined to impute criminality on a person for being a member of a band organisation and less that person resorted to violence or incited people to violence are created public disorder by violence on incitement to violence
IMPACT OF HATE SPEECH ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
- Right to freedom of speech and expression is one of the most essential Liberty is recognized by the democratic States
- The liberal theory of free speech view speech as an intrinsic aspect of autonomous individual, any restriction on the exercise of this Liberty is always subject to judicial scrutiny
- Objective of free speech in a democracy is to promote plurality of opinions
- The doctrine of free speech has evolved as a bulwark against its part to regulate speech
- The freedom of expression was one of the coal freedoms incorporated in the bill of rights
- The constituent assembly of India be conscious of the burdens of history placed at most impressed on the freedom of speech and expression as a hard and right of new democracy
Road ahead
- There is always a conflict between different narratives and interpretation of what constitutes a public interest in the plural democracy
- Democracy thrives on disagreements provided the do not cross the boundaries of civil discourse, critical and dissenting voice are important for a vibrant society
- However care must be taken to prevent public discourse from becoming a tool to promote speech in amical to public order as Indian constitution also acknowledges that Liberty cannot be absolute or uncontrolled and thus provided reasonable restrictions under article 19
- The mode of exercise, the context and the extent of abuse of freedom are important in determining the contours of permissible restrictions.
Next
previous
Latest News
General Studies