A recent examination by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch (NEW) has exposed an alarming number of lawmakers in India who have cases of hate speech registered against them. With 107 Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) having such charges, the findings underscore the urgent need for ethical conduct among those in political authority.
NEW is a broad campaign, active since 2002, involving over 1200 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other citizen-led groups that focus on electoral reforms and enhancement of democracy and governance in India. ADR, an NGO set up in 1999 in New Delhi, complements these efforts.
The Concept of Hate Speech
The Law Commission of India, in its 267th Report, explains hate speech as any communication that encourages hatred, primarily against groups defined by race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, and similar factors. The context of speech plays an essential role in determining if it amounts to a hate speech. This sort of communication can harm targeted individuals and groups and, at the same time, be detrimental to society by stoking hatred, violence, discrimination, and intolerance.
Legal Status of Hate Speech in India
Freedom of Speech, upheld by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution as a fundamental right, is subject to reasonable restrictions to counter misuse. Article 19(2) imposes limits in the interest of sovereignty, security, friendly international relations, public order, decency, morality, contempt of court, defamation, or incitement of an offense.
The Indian Penal Code addresses hate speech in Sections 153A, 153B, and 295A, punishing acts designed to promote discord and resentment between different groups and those that intentionally outrage the religious sentiments of a class of persons. Sections 505(1) and 505(2) deem the spread of content that may cause ill will or hatred an offense.
Moreover, the Representation of People’s Act (RPA), 1951, with Section 8, bars anyone convicted of abusing free speech from contesting elections. Sections 123(3A) and 125 of the RPA reiterate this, and label the stiring up of enmity or hatred between various classes of Indian citizens on grounds of race, religion, community, caste, or language, especially during elections, as corrupt electoral practices.
Furthermore, laws like the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, outlaw hate speech aimed against Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, and provocations to untouchability respectively.
Significant Judicial Precedents Relating to Hate Speech
Several critical cases have brought hate speech into focus. In Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India and Ors, 2022, the Supreme Court of India highlighted the importance of religious harmony for societal solidarity and directed immediate action by governments and police in hate speech matters.
In Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India, 2014, despite finding no legal basis for penalizing hate speech, the SC asked the Law Commission to explore the issue, thereby avoiding judicial overreach.
Lastly, Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015, dealt with the relevance of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 to the fundamental right to free speech. The Court differentiated between discussion, advocacy, and incitement, holding that the first two were integral to Article 19(1).
Addressing the Issue of Hate Speech Effectively
Education and awareness about the repercussions of hate speech can mitigate its detrimental effects on society. It’s essential to strengthen existing laws or implement new ones targeting hate speech. In addition, promoting media literacy, dialogue, counter-speech, self-regulation, and civil society engagement can suppress the spread of hate speech.
Lawmakers and political parties must adhere to conduct codes to curb hate speech. Media ethics should also discourage such practices.
In Summary
The alarming prevalence of hate speech cases among Indian lawmakers necessitates a concerted effort to promote ethical conduct. The negative effects of hate speech infringe upon societal harmony and individual well-being. Therefore, a systemic improvement – through education, stringent legislation, and strict adherence to conduct codes– is required to cultivate tolerance, respect, and responsible governance in India. Legal measures to check on hate speech are urgently needed.
