Hate Speech and Netas: Can the Law Rein In? | Free Speech or Hate Speech | Let's Talk Now

Handing down a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court constitution bench held that a government cannot be made vicariously responsible for remarks made by the minster, even if it concerns state of affairs. The powerful dissent of Justice BV Nagarathna points out that its incumbent upon the legislature to bring in a strong law over this issue. Hate speech can be a tricky subject in a country like India. Sometimes criticism of the government or religious dogmas can be termed as hate speech? Explicit sexual expressions can be curbed to guard ‘public morality’. But in a country deeply religious and strongly cultural like India, what is hate speech, and what’s pushing the limits of freedom of expression would always be contentious. The key takeaway from the Supreme Court judgment is that netas are not especially liable by virtue of their constitutional position. So to the statement of Azam Khan, the then government of the state of Uttar Pradesh cannot be held responsible. Should we view this judgment as a free pass for the netas to say anything or everything?

#SupremeCourt #Nagarathna #hatespeech #misogyny #Azamkhan