News Highlight
The court highlighted the problem of hate speech on TV, saying that anchors have become tools to peddle “agendas”, with content also dictated by the “money” behind TV channels.
Key Takeaway
- The Supreme Court on Friday said the “buck ultimately stops with the government” to clamp down on hate speech and hate crimes, as they are offences committed in society.
- The government agreed that hate could not hide behind the colour of any religion.
Hate Speech
- About
- Hate Speech is described as an incitement to hatred directed primarily towards a specific group of people based on their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, or other characteristics.
- Thus, hate speech is any word written or spoken, sign, or visible depiction within a person’s hearing or sight to provoke fear, alarm, or instigate violence.
- The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports a significant increase in cases of spreading hate speech and generating hostility in society.
- Reasons for Hate Speech
- Firstly, hate speech undermines social equality by reinforcing historical marginalisation and inequality.
- Hence, it is used to provoke violence and cause psychological and physical harm to its victims.
- It is used to incite individuals or societies to commit terrorist attacks, genocides, ethnic cleansing, and so on.
- In addition, as the judge correctly stated, TV stations host hate speeches to increase TRPs and earnings.
- Furthermore, it is a tool to create panic through rumour-mongering against targeted people. For example, the Northeast exodus.
Indian Constitution and hate speech
- Indian Constitution and hate speech
- It is protected as a fundamental right in the Constitution of India under Article 19(1) (a).
- And it states that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression.
- Article 19(2)
- The Indian constitution has proposed a reasonable restriction.
- Furthermore, the word reasonable should strike a balance between using and misusing this right.
Blasphemy
- About
- Section 295(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) punishes any speech, writing, or sign that insults citizens‘ religion.
- Furthermore, religious beliefs “with deliberate and malicious intent” with a fine and imprisonment for up to three years.
Need for Distinction between Blasphemy and Hate Speech Laws
- Too broad Interpretation
- Section 295(A) is far too broad, and it cannot be said that purposeful disrespect for religion or religious sensibilities is always incitement.
- Section 295(A) contains hate speech statutes
- The Supreme Court has stated on multiple occasions that the objective of hate speech prohibitions under Section 295(A).
- Moreover, it is to prevent bias and achieve equality.
- Laws Lack Clarity
- Hate speech laws are based on a critical distinction between criticising or ridiculing religion.
- As well as promoting prejudice or action against individuals or communities based on their beliefs.
- Unfortunately, there is a significant gap between this interpretation and the actual wording, which means that the law is still being abused at all levels of government.
Measures to curb hate speech
- Facebook, Google, Twitter, and ByteDance are contemplating an industry-wide cooperation to combat fake news on their platforms in India.
- The Election Commission of India must collaborate with technology businesses to determine the source of such news.
- In addition, educating end users.
- To participate on a deeper level, the government should release a policy framework on the potential harm caused by internet messaging networks.
- Levying significant fines, such as in Germany, where social media firms risk fines of up to €50 million for repeatedly failing to remove illegal content from their websites.
Conclusion
- Hate speech attempts to marginalise other classes and groups of people already marginalised because of their race, language, or religion.
- Recent examples of high-profile politicians giving statements were blatant attempts to incite violence, which resulted in widespread violence.
- In addition, law enforcement agencies have failed to address these incidents.
- Many critics say that India’s hate speech laws are insufficient, yet, the present rules are more than competent to deal with such occurrences.
- The part missing in not containing this threat is a lack of execution of these regulations due to factors such as political influence.
Pic Courtesy: The Hindu
Content Source: The Hindu