SC must send a strong signal on hate speech

Hours after the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday asked the Uttarakhand government to ensure that the guidelines on hate speech laid down in judgments delivered in 2018 and 2019 are adhered to, the state said a planned Dharma Sansad was unauthorised and detained its organisers. Such religious parliaments have become common over recent months, and, contrary to what their name suggests, ended up serving as forums for inflammatory speeches targeting minorities, usually Muslims. Unfortunately, states have been reluctant to crack down on these, till forced to by media coverage, political push, and public outrage, and the organisers of such events have read this reluctance as implicit support.

There’s a thin line between words and action, and the environment created by these Dharma Sansads has turned some parts of the country into a virtual tinderbox. Over the past few months, there has also been an increase in the frequency and intensity of communal clashes, with the coercive action of some states in response seeming to target Muslims (demolitions in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi are a case in point). It is possible that some of the clashes may have been prevented by prompt action — but most states have, at best, not reacted till after the event, and at worst, actually fanned the flames themselves.

While the Indian judiciary has been known to overreach sometimes, given the reticence of elected leaders, it is perhaps time for the SC to lay down the law (again) on hate speech, and remind governments of its 2018 and 2019 guidelines on how to prevent them, and, in the unfortunate event they can’t be prevented, how to deal with the aftermath.