'Are We Now Reaching The Extreme Of Genocide?': Justice Madan Lokur Decries Executive Inaction Against Hate Speech Incidents; Calls For Special Law

Justice Madan B Lokur, former judge of the Supreme Court of India on Sunday underscored the urgent need to ensure that the Parliament enacts a law on hate speech considering the fact that hate speeches against minorities in India are on an alarming rise. Justice Lokur was speaking at a webinar titled 'Hate Speech In India' conducted by the organisation Manthan. Justice Lokur highlighted several recent instances of hate speech and the purported 'silence' of the Executive and the Judiciary in effectively taking measures to curb such incidents. "Are we now reaching the extreme of genocide? Is it not time to act? Is it not time for the public opinion to build up to say- let's have a law, lets get down to action. Let's not just be silent spectators whether we belong to the Executive or whether we belong to the Judiciary. As members of cilvil society we deserve a civil society and how can we have a civil society if we have events like this happening around us and how long are we going to tolerate it?", Justice Lokur remarked. Statutory provisions Justice Lokur stated that at present the law in India does not contain a specific definition of hate speech. However, he referred to various provisions of the Indian Penal Code which could broadly encompass within its ambit an offence of hate speech. He referred to Sections 153A, 153B and 505 that criminalises attempts made to cause public mischief, tamper with national integrity, promote disharmony between different groups on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc."The moment you are attempting to do it or trying to create this kind of a friction between religions, between castes, between communities in regions and so on, you are committing a punishable criminal offence. So I think the way I look like it, hate speech would come in one of these definitely and it has a very broad sort of a meaning", Justice Lokur averred further. He also referred to the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 such as Sections 123 and 125 which prohibits promotion and the attempt to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language, by a candidate or his agent or any other person. Furthermore, it was highlighted that Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 only disqualifies a candidate only upon conviction. NCRWC reportJustice Lokur also referred to the report of the National Commission to review the working of the Constitution (NCRWC) chaired by former Justice M.N Venkatachaliah. The Commission had recommended that punishment for electoral malpractices must be made mandatory. Furthermore, Justice Lokur also stated that the Commission had recommended the disqualification of a candidate even in an instance where candidate's election agent or somebody at the instance of the candidate tries to bring about disharmony between communities. "So it is one thing for a candidate to say "I did not say anything" or my election agent did not say anything But if somebody at your instance, at the instance of the candidate, at the instance of the election agent tries to bring about this disharmony or hated between communities then the candidate is responsible.. the committee wanted to broaden the scope of hate speech and to make it into a more serious electoral offence which is punishable with mandatory punishment and also disqualification", Justice Lokur enumerated further. Judicial decisions Justice Lokur made a reference to the Supreme Court decision in Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India wherein certain fundamental principles had been laid down. The Apex Court had held that hate speech would include an intention to or having the effect of deligimatising, marginalising people belonging to a religion, community, caste creed etc and beyond causing mere distress. Justice Lokur pertinently mentioned that the Supreme Court in this case did not make any reference to violence and had held that an act could be categorised as hate speech even if no violence takes place as a consequence to it. "So it is not just saying something or upsetting a person, it is something much more than that. Criticising a person for example may cause distress, may cause unhappiness but it is something beyond that. What I find important in this is there is no mention of violence. They have said deligimitised, marginalised, beyond causing distress. There is no mention of violence", he stated further. The Apex Court had also stated that hate speech lays the ground work for discrimination and even genocide. Opining that this is extremely significant in the current circumstances, Justice Lokur remarked further, "The second thing that Supreme Court said and which I think is very very important in today's context is that hate speech lays the ground work for discrimination, ostracisation, segregation, deportation, violence and in extreme cases genocide."267th Report of the Law ...

'Are We Now Reaching The Extreme Of Genocide?': Justice Madan Lokur Decries Executive Inaction Against Hate Speech Incidents; Calls For Special Law

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags