Tackling Hate Speech

Context: As there are no laws on hate speech as such, India needs political and pedagogical solution to the menace.

About hate speech

• Core principle of prohibiting hate speech: In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire Case (1942),S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. Constitution does not protect ‘insulting or fighting’ words, which inflict injury or tends to breach peace.
  • Taking a cue, liberal democracies prohibit certain speech in societal interest.
• Need for prohibition of hate speech in liberal democracies
  • Hate speech is against dignity and equality of individuals: As hate speech views members as an enemy, illegitimate and unequal, creating fissures in social fabric.
  • It creates barriers of mistrust and hostility between individuals and groups, obstructs normal relations & creates a corrosive influence on the collective life.
  • It degrades democratic values: In B. Sangathan v. Union of India (2014) Case, SC of India stated that, hate speech influences the ability of protected group to respond to the substantive ideas under debate and becomes a barrier to participatory democracy.
  • Essential in protecting minority views and interests: Which otherwise will go un-noticed under majoritarian rhetoric.

Issues with hate speech

• Definitional issues: As hate speech as such, is not defined under Constitution or in penal statutes.
• Law suffers from disuse and misuse: Arising from biased implementation, vague charging of the provision etc.
• Law fails to check ideology of hatred in society, which is still used as a political tool.

Way forward: We need a political and pedagogical solution to the menace

• Constitutional ideas of equality, liberty and fraternity must be made topics of continuing public education.
• Responsibility of State: To invoke existing law judiciously in appropriate cases. It must also take a secular stand based on the rule of law and educate the masses.