There are Laws to Deal With It: SC
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to grapple with the politically-contentious issue of divisive speeches delivered in the heat and dust of poll season, saying there were enough laws to deal with them.
A two-judge bench, comprising Justices Dipak Misra and NV Ramana, rejected a PIL which had been filed by a Varanasi resident urging the court to direct the Election Commission to withdraw recognition to political parties indulging in such acts.
Zafar Imam Naqvi, a lawyer, had sought court intervention to protect poll officials and the electorate from the fall-out of such speeches and also cancellation of candidature of leaders indulging in such behavior.
BJP PM candidate Narendra Modi is pitted against the AAP’s Arvind Kejriwal in this high-voltage contest.
The petition drew the court’s attention to several speeches made during the recent election campaign by leaders of certain political parties and its adverse effects on social harmony. It had argued that such hate speeches were total-
ly unwarranted and could endanger the safety and security of public and undermine the structure of our democratic body polity. Naqvi, who argued his own case, claimed that the court had a constitutional duty to step in and direct the EC to take appropriate action when such speeches by leaders disturb the equilibrium of society and threaten a crack in the multi-faceted fabric of society. He also urged the court to direct the EC to cancel the recognition granted to such political parties and also to protect the liberty and safety of the citizens. But the bench rejected his plea. Justice Misra writing the judgement said that the court would only step in, in a total vacuum i.e. a complete absence of any law to enforce rights.