Supreme Court on hate speech

Treat Hate Speech ‘Alike’ Independent of the Offender’s Faith, SC Tells Police

The court once again instructed states and Union territories to follow the guidelines it issued in the Tehseen Poonawala judgment (2018) to prevent instances of mob lynching and hate speeches.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has made it clear that hate speeches against any religion need to be “treated alike” and “dealt with as per law”, independent of the offender’s faith, Hindustan Times reported.

Hearing a batch of petitions on Friday, August 18, a division of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti hoped that all state and Union territory governments are following the guidelines laid down by the top court in its 2018 judgment in the Tehseen Poonawala case to deal with hate speeches. The top court issued an extensive set of guidelines and preventive steps to be taken by states to prevent instances of mob lynching and hate speeches in the particular 2018 verdict.

“We are very clear. Whether it be one side or the other side, they have to be treated alike. If anyone indulges in anything which we know as ‘hate speech’, they will be dealt with as per the law. Something we have already expressed our opinion on. This does not need to be repeated,” Justice Khanna said on behalf of the bench, according to Livelaw.

One of the petitioners submitted to the court that during a rally held in Kerala by the young wing of the Indian Union of Muslim League (IUML) in July, a slogan was raised that said “death to the Hindus”. To this, the court said hate speech by anyone, irrespective of their religion, will not be tolerated.

In relation to the particular incident which the petitioner referred to, the Kerala Police booked over 300 people, including members from the youth wing of the IUML, for allegedly raising provocative slogans against Hindus. IUML is a constituent member of the Congress-led United Democratic Front, which is in opposition in the state.

The court was hearing petitions on hate speech afresh on Friday after one Shaheen Abdullah moved the top court alleging instances of hate speeches made against Muslims during the recent Nuh violence in Haryana. The petitioner alleged that some of the Hindu groups issued open calls to boycott Muslims, telling shopkeepers not to employ Muslims in their stores.

The division bench allowed a week’s time to the Centre and Haryana government to come back with a response detailing whether or not instructions were given to authorities concerned regarding the formation of a committee to examine the material and verify if criminal cases were filed. As per the 2018 judgment, the top court instructed state governments to form a committee and designate a nodal officer to register hate crimes and pursue investigations into such cases.

Based on its 2018 judgment, the court has been trying to institute a mechanism with law enforcement officials at the local level to pursue matters of hate speech and to make sure that the top court of the country does not become the first forum for an aggrieved party to approach for registration of FIRs.

Adding to its 2018 verdict on hate speeches, the apex court, in October 2022, ordered police to immediately register cases against hate speech makers and offenders who committed acts of communal violence without waiting for a formal complaint to be filed.

The court listed the matter for the next hearing on August 25.

News18 India Fined Rs 50,000 by Self-Regulatory Body for Platforming ‘Extreme Views’

The NBDSA said that during a debate on hijab, anchor Aman Chopra failed to stop the other panellists from crossing the boundary.

New Delhi: The self-regulatory body for news broadcasters recently fined News18 India Rs 50,000 for the way in which a discussion on the hijab ban in Karnataka was conducted, saying the channel gave panellists a platform to express “extreme views” which could adversely affect communal harmony.

The News Broadcasting & Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA), which is the self-regulatory body for all members of the News Broadcasters & Digital Association, issued the order on October 21 based on a complaint filed by an individual.

The programme against which the complaint was filed was a debate conducted by News18 India – aired on April 6, 2022 – on the controversy that emerged in Karnataka following a ban imposed by the government on wearing hijab in educational institutions. Then Al-Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri had praised a Muslim girl who had responded to a group of boys heckling her with “Allahu Akbar”.

During the broadcast, the anchor Aman Chopra referred to the Muslim students as “hijabi gang”, “Hijabwali Gazwa Gang” and made a false allegations that they had resorted to rioting, the complaint said. He also claimed that Zawahiri and terrorist organisations were behind the hijab row in India. One panellists accused another panellist of being a supporter of terrorist groups, the complaint said.

Also Read: As TV Anchors Use Mob Attacks on Sadhus to Fuel Anti-Muslim Hate, Real Dangers Ignored

The NBDSA said that the channel was free to choose the topic of discussion “as it comes within the freedom of expression of the broadcaster” but said it is primarily concerned with the fact as to whether the broadcaster and anchor adhered to the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards during the show.

“It is reiterated that NBDSA did not have any issue with the subject of the debate. However, on examination of the matter, it found that the problem lay with the narrative and the tilt that was given to the programme,” the order, signed by NBDSA chairperson and former Supreme Court judge A.K. Sikri says.

The body said that it did not find merit in the broadcaster’s submission that the terms “Hijabi Gang”, “Hijabwali Gazwa Gang” and “the Zawahiri gang” were used only in respect of the “invisible powers which were allegedly behind the controversy” and not in respect of the students who were protesting.

Muslim women in hijab participate in a candle light march during a protest rally over the ‘hijab’ ban in Karnataka, in Kolkata, February 11, 2022. Photo: PTI Photo/Swapan Mahapatra

It also “strongly deprecated” the tendency of the broadcaster to associate those panellists who were in favour of the hijab with Zawahiri and labelling them as “Zawahiri gang member”, “Zawahiri’s ambassador”,”Zawahiri is your God, you are his fan”, etc. The NBDSA said it also did not find any justification in linking those panellists or persons who were supporting the hijab with Al-Qaeda by airing tickers stating “#AlQaedaGangExposed”.

The order says that the anchor had not only acted in flagrant disrespect of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards but had also failed to abide by the decision of the Bombay high court in Nilesh Navalakha vs Union of India (2021), which enjoins an anchor to apply their mind to prevent the programme from drifting beyond the permissible limits.

NBDSA noted that even the Supreme Court has recently stressed on the role of the anchor to maintain a balance between the panellists and the crucial role they play in stopping hate speech. “However, in the instant case, not only had the anchor failed to stop the other panellists from crossing the boundary but had given them a platform to express extreme views which could adversely affect the communal harmony in the country,” the order says.

It said the programme violated the principles relating to impartiality, neutrality, fairness and good taste & decency under the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage, apart from the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards. “NBDSA stated that the broadcaster would be well advised to guide and train its anchor on how to conduct debates on such sensitive issues,” the order notes.

Keeping in mind the “repetitive nature of the above violations”, the NBDSA decided to impose a fine of Rs 50,000 on the broadcaster and admonished the broadcaster. It said if such violations are repeated in future, it may have to direct the broadcaster to ensure the presence of the anchor Aman Chopra before it. The body also directed the broadcaster to remove the video of the programme from its website and all platforms within seven days of the order.

Also Read: SC’s Words on TV ‘Hate Speech’ Strike Several Chords, But Will Govt and News Anchors Listen?

Two other orders issued

The NBDSA also issued two other orders related to News18 India on the same day, one relating to a programme on “bulldozer justice” aired on April 20, 2022 and another in which the complaint said the channel created a false narrative around the demolition of a temple in Rajasthan’s Alwar, aired on April 22, 2022.

About the demolition of alleged illegal constructions, the NBDSA “strongly deprecated the tendency of the broadcaster to generalise sensitive issues” and the use of offending tickers like “Jihadi”, which it said was totally unnecessary. “Had the debate confined to the menace of illegal constructions and the steps that are required to contain such illegal constructions, there could not have been any problem. However, the narrative of the programme gave an altogether different tilt and in the process violated the guidelines prescribed in the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards which was impermissible,” the order says, asking the broadcaster to take down this video also.

On the programme about the temple in Alwar, the self-regulatory body deferred its decision after the channel informed it that several FIRs were registered in respect of the programme and its anchor and that the matter is currently being investigated by Rajasthan Police and is also sub-judice before the Jaipur and Jodhpur benches of the Rajasthan high court.

After SC Rap, Delhi Police Files Fresh ‘Hate Speech’ Case Against Suresh Chavhanke

The Supreme Court on April 22 had pulled up Delhi Police for its affidavit which concluded that no hate speech was made at the December Hindu Yuva Vahini event.

New Delhi: The Delhi Police has registered a fresh case against Sudarshan TV head Suresh Chavhanke over hate speech at the December 2021 Hindu Yuva Vahini event in the national capital.

The Supreme Court on April 22 had pulled up Delhi Police for its affidavit which concluded that no hate speech was made at the event. The police had told the top court that the gathering was made up of people who were motivated to “save the ethics of their community”.

On December 19, 2021, Chavhanke at the Hindu Yuva Vahini event was seen administering an oath to a group of people to “die for and kill” to make India a “Hindu rashtra”, or a Hindu nation. The video of the said oath was posted on Twitter by Chavhanke himself.

Esha Pandey, deputy commissioner of police, Southeast Delhi had said in an earlier affidavit, “None of the words spoken during the events in any manner whatsoever overtly and explicitly described Indian Muslims as usurpers of territory, and as predators of land, livelihoods and of Hindu women, and nothing was said or done which could create an environment of paranoia amongst any religion, caste or creed.”

There is no use of such words which mean or could be interpreted as “open calls of genocide of Muslims”, the police had said in the controversial affidavit.

Also read: Jamia Shooter Now Amplifying Hindutva ‘Hate’ Music Videos Featuring Violence Against Muslims

Police had further said that the fundamental freedom of speech could not be suppressed unless it threatened “community interests.”

According to the Hindu, the apex court had expressed incredulity at the tone of the affidavit, asking the police whether “it had really applied its mind” while figuring out what it wanted to say in the affidavit, after which the police agreed to “file a better affidavit”.

In the new affidavit, the police have said that a first information report (FIR) has been filed on May 4 at Okhla Industrial Area Police Station under sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on the basis of religion, race, birth, etc.), 295A (deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings), 298 (uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent, to wound the religious feelings of any person) and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, NDTV reported.

“All links in the complaint and other material available in the public domain were analysed, and a video was found on YouTube,” the police told the news outlet.

The case will be next heard on May 9.