- Ideally speaking, aspirational society like India – a thriving and vibrant democracy – should be functioning in an appreciative manner taking into consideration diverse viewpoints emanating from different quarters. More so in a country where different belief systems and religion essays an extremely significant role. Of course, a democratic form of governance also denotes several contrasting voices from the political class who wish to ensure their respective vote banks are not only assiduously cultivated but also strengthened through legally available means. Yes, parochial considerations do come into play and one-upmanship is not too far behind as well. We know how quintessential our political class has molded themselves to stay relevant all this while.
PC: Er. Sheikh Aaqib
- One thing that none of the societies across the world would wish to encounter is blatant polarization efforts that would divide the very fabric of harmonious living. Sadly, Indian political leaders, irrespective of party affiliations, are found to be breaching the same with impunity to further their diabolical intentions more often than not. We have heard enough hate speeches originating from spewing venom against communities over the last few years intended to stir controversies and further polarize the already deeply polarized society. This being the case, it was heartening to note that the Supreme Court appears to agree that hate speech is a big negative for social peace. The key point is what are the deterrents against those talking up hate? Not much.
- For the benefit of those concerned, the latest high-profile hate speech controversy involves two BJP-elected representatives at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event. Delhi police have filed an FIR on this. In May, a People’s Front of India march in Kerala saw a minor chanting violent threats against two other communities. And last December, there was a flood of hate speech at the Dharm Sansad in Haridwar. Indeed, it can be reasonably argued that the lack of quick and meaningful police and legal action against hate speech encourages more such statements and rhetoric. Police forces sometimes file FIR, the cases start trundling through lower courts, and once in a while, SC agrees to take up a matter, but even SC is overburdened…and so goes this depressing story.
PC: Advocate Chikirsha Mohanty
- Another part of this story is that with a few welcome exceptions, political parties rarely act against their own. Mind you, it must start with the cops. Police forces have to be vigilant and proactive, lodging clearly argued FIRs immediately, making arrests, filing chargesheets, and energetically pursuing trials. Nonetheless, the leadership of all political parties should show zero tolerance for hate speech forcing the cops to act. Also, SC and high courts prioritizing a few hate speech cases for supervision would usher in intended seriousness. Rather than have a separate law that can be willfully misinterpreted, we need a comprehensive deterrent measure in place that ensures some hate speech givers quickly pay for what they have said.
