Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance
Context
- The Supreme Court said that hate speech and rumour-mongering stemmed from an “us versus them” mindset and worked to corrupt a sense of fraternity in a diverse society.
About
- A series of petitions were filed seeking separate laws for hate speech and crimes.
- The court declined to direct the enactment of specific laws against hate speech and crimes, instead it called for effective enforcement of existing laws.
- The judgment said the court cannot enter into the exclusive legislative domain and left it to the Union government and legislative authorities.
What are Hate Crimes?
- Hate crimes are any crimes that are targeted at a person because of hostility or prejudice towards that person’s disability, race or ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation, gender identity etc.
- In India, the term “hate crime” is not separately defined in law, but such acts are punishable under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and now the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Impact of Hate Crimes
- Social issues: It deepens divisions between communities and disrupts long-standing social cohesion. Repeated hateful narratives escalate into mob violence, riots, and targeted attacks.
- Erosion of Constitutional Values: It challenges the principles of equality, fraternity, and dignity enshrined in the Constitution.
- It undermines secularism, a core pillar of India’s constitutional morality.
- Fear and Marginalisation: Communities subjected to repeated hate incidents experience fear, exclusion, and reduced access to opportunities, harming social harmony.
Constitutional Provisions
- Article 14 Equality Before Law: Guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws to all persons.
- Article 15 Prohibition of Discrimination: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
- Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution deals with the reasonable restrictions that can be placed on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
- Conditions under which speech can be restricted by the state: Security of the State, Public Order, Decency or Morality, Contempt of Court, Defamation, Incitement to Offense.
- Article 21 Right to Life and Personal Liberty: Guarantees the right to live with dignity, safety, and security.
- Article 25 Freedom of Religion: Ensures freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion.
Challenges in Addressing Hate speech
- Rapid Digital Amplification: Social media platforms enable hate speech to spread rapidly and reach large audiences without fact-checking.
- Encrypted messaging services complicate monitoring and evidence collection.
- Difficulty in Proving Intent: Many hate speech offences require proving intent, which is hard to establish.
- Establishing a direct link between speech and subsequent violence is legally complex.
- Absence of a Legal Definition: India lacks a precise statutory definition of hate speech and crime, resulting in broad interpretation and inconsistent enforcement across states.
Steps taken to Address Hate Crimes
- Indian Penal Code (IPC) / Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023: Specific sections like Section 153A, Section 295A, etc in penal codes criminalize promoting enmity between groups (religion, race, language), outraging religious feelings, or inciting public fear/disorder.
- Representation of the People Act, 1951 Sec. 123(3), 123(3A): Prohibit political speech that promotes hatred or appeals to religion, caste, community during elections.
- The Supreme Court, in the case of Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (2014), acknowledged the lack of specific legislation on hate speech and recommended that the Parliament enact a comprehensive law to address this issue
- In the case of Amish Devgan v. Union of India (2020) the Supreme Court of India addressed the balance between freedom of speech and expression (Article 19) and the need to restrict hate speech to maintain public order and communal harmony.
Way Ahead
- India should adopt a clear and comprehensive legal definition of hate speech and crime to ensure uniform and objective enforcement, supported by stronger accountability mechanisms for digital platforms to swiftly remove harmful content.
- An independent oversight mechanism for online harms, combined with better data collection and research, can help design evidence-based interventions and strengthen India’s commitment to equality, dignity, and social cohesion.
Source: TH
