Breaking| All Communities Are Responsible For Hate Speech: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today in a batch of petitions seeking directions to curb hate speech matters, particularly the instances related to Nuh communal violence, the Court has directed parties to forward the materials related to hate speech to the Noda Officers appointed pursuant to the judgment of the Court in Tehseen Poonawalla's case.
The Court observed during the hearing that all the communities are responsible for hate speech.
The Bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice S.V.N Bhatti directed that the matter be relisted on Friday when the Court said it will consider setting up of a Committee constituted by the DGP of the state to consider materials related to hate speech. When an SHO receives any complaint, the same can be forwarded to the Committee to examine the material with regard to content and authenticity and issue directions to the concerned SHOs, the Court suggested.
At the outset, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for the petitioner remarked that the Court must protect people and "this kind of vitriol cannot go on".
"There has to be some sort of harmony and comity between communities. Everybody is responsible. All the communities are responsible", Justice Khanna told the Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj.
ASG Natarj said that the law is settled and there is a mechanism but that somehow it is not working in some cases.
People are saying these things when the police is around, Sibal submitted. The AAG of the state of Haryana submitted that in the case pointed out by Petitioners, an FIR has been registered.
The Court then adjourned the matters to Friday.
On August 4, 2023, the bench had remarked, "I think there are many definitions, the real problem is not the definition part, definition is obviously a complex issue. The implementation and the execution part, that you will have to think about something".
The remark came while the Court was dealing with a batch of pleas concerning hate speech matters, while the Court was considering the plea filed against the rallies organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in the Delhi NCT region, in protest against the communal violence that occurred in Nuh, Haryana. The Bench had earlier refused to stop the rallies proposed to be organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
While saying that, Justice Khanna earlier had also said that there are enough definitions, including his own judgment in Amish Devgn v. Union of India and Others (2020), and that yet it remains complex.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Union then submitted, "Your lordships have clarified the law on hate speech in Tehseen Poonawala. Nobody can justify hate speech by A community or B community, I am not. If there is any violation of law, the remedy would be to file an FIR. If FIR is not registered, the remedy would be to approach the competent court. What is the practice that has now developed is, first to come here seek contempt, and thereafter see that the Supreme Court directs something to be done. Now a step ahead, before any organization or any person organizes a function they come by way of an advance ruling and seek a direction that so as to ensure no offence is committed...".
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleging selective outrage, argued, "The difficulty is this petitioner, staying in Delhi, hailing from Kerala files petition only for Maharashtra for one community".
Previously, the Court had taken serious exception to hate speeches and had said that the moment politics and religions are separated and politicians stop using religion in politics, such speeches will go away.
