Legal experts welcome Supreme Court’s recent intervention against hate speech and tells Mohd Naushad Khan that it depends on how proactively the concerned State implements the word of the Apex Court.The nation has reached a perilous curve due to the use of hate as a political tool. The government, the ruling party, the judiciary and everyone having a stake in peace must come forward to reign in the volcano of hatred which has potential to burn the nation if not stopped immediately.
On April 28, the Supreme Court of India directed all States and Union Territories (UTs) to file cases suo motu against those making hate speeches even without any complaint.
The SC in its order said, “Respondent Nos… (all States and UTs) shall ensure that immediately as and when any speech or any action takes place which attracts offences such as Sections 153A, 153B and 295A and 505 of the IPC etc., suo motu action will be taken to register cases even if no complaint is forthcoming and proceed against the offenders in accordance with law.”
The Supreme Court expanded the reach of its 2022 decision and instructed all States and Union Territories to register hate speech cases even if no complaints are made. The court described hate speech as a severe offence that might have an impact on the secular fabric of the nation. The Supreme Court also issued a warning that failure to file hate speech charges on time would constitute contempt of court.
According to the court, “No one can be allowed to break the law, regardless of the caste, community, or religion of the maker of the speech.” In October 2022, the Supreme Court had expressed worry over hate speech in the nation and ordered the governments of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand to take suo motu action against offenders without considering religion.
Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, while welcoming Supreme Court’s recent intervention against hate speech, said, “It is most certainly a welcome order rather a milestone in containing hate speech. Although it is also not the first time that the Supreme Court has expressed its concerns regarding the rising climate of hatred and intolerance in the country. In 2018, the then Chief Justice Dipak Misra’s bench had rendered an exhaustive judgment detailing preventive, punitive and remedial guidelines to be followed by all States and Police forces in relation to mob lynchings or hate crimes. After that recently, Justice Khanwilkar had also asked for the said guidelines to be followed.”
Advocate Ayyubi argued, “So far as impact of a judgment is concerned, it depends on how proactively the concerned State implements the word of the Apex Court. The 2018 guidelines and the case where they were issued, though establishing a strong framework to prevent any such incidents, remained in cold storage in the tenure of at least two successive chief justices. Contempt petitions in that case still remain pending. Justice Joseph’s order now is a milestone in the sense that it not only directs the State to take stringent action in accordance with law but also contains a warning for the erring officials failing to comply with this order.”
Advocate Nasir Aziz, president of SAMLA (South Asian Minorities Lawyers Association), said, “These days hate is being used extensively for political reasons and purpose. The present regime is actually thriving on it and if you look at the graph of increase in their vote percentage and popularity, it is evident that it is proportionate to the increase in hate propaganda unleashed by the ruling political setup. Now, this hatred and polarisation between communities has reached a point where it may be strengthening the ruling party but it is surely weakening the nation.”
He further said, “The nation has reached a perilous curve due to the use of hate as a political tool. There are enough provisions in the existing laws to deal with the hate, and hate speech. A recent brutal act is certainly the outcome of a vicious hate circle which may be a potential harbinger of a bigger catastrophe.”
The SAMLA president observed, “The government, the ruling party, the judiciary and everyone having a stake in peace must come forward to reign in the volcano of hatred which has potential to burn the nation if not stopped immediately. The least the nation expects is an appeal for peace by the PM. A serious effort is required by the Judiciary to overturn the trend and apply the available laws to stop the vicious circle of hate.”
On legal perceptive, Abdul Hafiz Gandhi, Assistant Professor of Law and national spokesperson, Samajwadi Party said, “Laws to prevent hate speech need to be strengthened but within constitutional limits prescribed by Article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India. I am a proponent of free speech but freedom of speech cannot be used to spread communal hatred and enmity in the society. Speech inciting violence cannot be allowed in any civilised society. We live in a country which is so diverse in terms of cultures, religions, food habits and languages. We need to respect this diversity. I support diversity of views too but within the constitutional restrictions.”