Democracies can not thrive under the threat of hate speech. Inclusiveness and celebration of diversity constitute an indestructible role for any democracy to grow and flourish. A free and respectful exchange of ideas and information is indispensable for a healthy political and social ecosystem. Ideal to say so! With the rise of technology and media to communicate, there is a rise in disagreements. “Might is always right!”
As a famous quote goes, “The tongue has no bones but is strong enough to break a heart. So, be careful with your words.”
Society is on a battlefield every day, fighting words against words that cut deep into the hearts. Sadly this war of words is taking a new shape: A shape of hatred and bigotry.
Hate speech suppresses the issues discussed in a healthy democracy. It derails the discourse and spreads disharmony among people. Hate speech has become a tool for the majority to snatch the rights of vulnerable people.
Before we understand how termite-like Hate speech impacts societies, let’s explain what hate speech exactly is:
What is Hate Speech?
According to the Collins English Dictionary, it is “speech disparaging a group on the grounds of color, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability, or a person who identifies with such a group.” [1]
Merriam-Webster defines it as “speech that is intended to insult, offend, or intimidate a person because of some trait (as race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or disability) [2] While there is no legal definition of hate speech in the international humanitarian laws, the multilateral organization – the United Nations (UN) defines it as “any kind of communication in speech, writing or behavioral, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, nationality, race, color, descent, gender, or other identity factors.” [3]
Even with this sketchy understanding of the concept, one thing is crystal clear: hate speech undermines the social fabric, as it calls out real or perceived identity factors of an individual or a group.
How Hate Speech Ended Lives Of Many:
Rwanda Genocide: A Tale of Hate
The horrors that occurred in the tiny African country of Rwanda in 1994 are an example of what hate speech can do. Over 1 million people perished, constituting around 12 percent of the total population. About 15,000 to 20,000 women were subjected to sexual assault. [4]
Radio Television Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM), a Rwandan radio station that started in 1993, nearly a year before the April-July 1994 Rwandan genocide, has played a critical role in “cultivating” anti-Tutsi notions in society and spurring the masses of Hutu militants to resort to violence under the banner of “justice and self-preservation.” [5]
Hate Speech in India:
As early as the second week of 2023, on January 13th, the apex court of the nation observed that hate speech and crimes should be clamped down.
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice KM Joseph and Justice BV Nagarathna stated: “This is a complete menace and nothing short of it. We should all be careful about the seriousness of hate speech… We should not end up creating a Frankenstein (Monster) that will gobble (us) up.”
The remarks came after Uttar Pradesh informed the court — about 580 cases of hate speech it registered in 2021–2022. One hundred sixty of these were registered by the police as Suo Motos.
Discussions on hate speech often raise questions about freedom of speech, censorship, and the use of multimedia for propaganda. Flagging the intricacies, Justice KM Joseph stated that TV channels “have to be very clear that they cannot go on TV and speak their minds whichever way they want… That is not the exercise of freedom… Freedom comes with responsibilities.” [6] The Supreme Court verdicts, like in the case filed by the Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan (2014), have observed that issues of hate speech result in marginalizing people based on their real or perceived identity.
Existing Laws To Tackle Hate Speech:
• The Indian Penal Code: provision in the section 153A, 153B 295A, 505 etc deals with hate speech. For instance, Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code penalizes “promoting enmity between different groups on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth, etc. and committing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.”
• The Representation of Peoples Act of 1951, has provisions regarding hate speech, the subsection 3 talks about the prohibition of any electoral appeal on the grounds of race, caste, religion, etc.
• Article 19 (2) of the Indian Constitution demarcates a line between the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression and the responsibilities attached to it. As it states – “Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offense” [7]
While the debate over whether existing provisions are adequate to deal with the issue of “hate speech” and curtailment of the fundamental right to free speech and expression while dealing with it remains contested.
However, the change lies in the efforts of the masses, every individual. Hate speech should be confronted at each turn and every level.
Muzzling Voices: Spiral Of Silence Taking Over Calling Out Hate Speech
The topic of hate speech can not go unaddressed without mentioning free speech. There is a natural tendency to overlap hate speech with free speech under the pretext we are all allowed to speak whatever we want. Sorry! That’s not the case! Where Article 19 (1) of the Indian constitution guarantees free speech and expression to all, Article 19 (2) institutes reasonable restrictions.
Hate speech constitutes gestures, words, and actions meant to insult others and strip them from the accepted society. These are often the majority-holding thought makers throwing garbage at minority groups, then, in retaliation, minorities spew uncomfortable, pejorative words weaving a vicious circle.
In this web of counter-accusations, often sane voices get lost. They do not find space between hate and unbridled speech as they do not conform to popular views, although completely backed with reasonings and explanations.
Under this context, if we see, the theory of Spiral Of Silence postulated by German survey and communication researcher Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in the 1960s and ’70s widely attempts to describe how people refrain from expressing their unpopular opinions on controversial public issues not conforming to majority standards. A perception that one’s opinion is unpopular inhibits or discourages one’s expression of it, whereas a perception that it is popular has the opposite effect. Most people inhibit expressing their so-called unpopular opinion out of fear of social isolation. [8]
If we look at it through the lens of modern times, in the times of the internet where the world is on your finger, minority views do not find a platform to raise their voices. They fear constructively criticizing someone for wrongdoing simply because they know they will be isolated socially.
Contrarily, those who sense their opinions are majoritarian and would be appreciated often put forth thoughts fearlessly and, at times, vociferously, even at the cost of the lives of many.
What boosts people in power to muzzle the minority viewpoint is the assurance- nobody would say anything to them as they hold the majority view. People with power believe it is okay throwing the dignities of minorities in bins.
Here are instances showing how hate speech takes precedence over free speech: It is to be noted that the view of the majority does not mean the view of all.
Hate Speech: Minorities, a Scapegoat For Majority’s Propaganda
Instance 1: Minister of Information and Broadcasting- Anurag Thakur’s speech at the Rithala election rally| January 27, 2020
Case: Anurag Thakur was caught on camera in a rally in Rithala before the then-approaching Delhi Assembly elections. In a video clip circulating across social media platforms, the BJP MP who holds portfolios of I&B Ministry and Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports could be seen passing a remark targeting a specific community and encouraging throng of people to speak an offensive slogan. (Source: Indian Express ) [9]
Action Taken: No FIR was lodged, according to Delhi Police. In response to the Delhi High Court’s intervention in the case, the Delhi Police issued a report claiming that the language used during the demonstration did not refer to any specific area and that, as a result, no cognizable offense was committed.
Instance 2: BJP Leader Kapil Mishra Inflammatory Comment, During pro-CAA demonstration at Maujpur Chowk | February 23, 2020
Case: In a video, BJP leader Kapil Mishra during his pro-CAA demonstration at Maujpur Chowk, was seen giving ‘an ultimatum’ to the police to vacate the roads blocked by anti-CAA protesters in Jafrabad and Bhajanpura areas within three days, failing upon he would come back on to the streets.
One could hear Kapil Mishra say, “Till the US President is in India, we are leaving the area peacefully. After that, we won’t listen to you [police] if the roads are not vacated by then.” The then-DCP of North East District, Ved Prakash Surya, was visible in the clip standing next to him.
Action Taken: No FIR was filed. In response to Delhi High Court’s direction to submit an action report, the police said they found no evidence.
The affidavit stated “as and when substantial evidence of involvement of the aforesaid person surfaces, Delhi Police will take suitable steps. However, no fresh FIR is warranted at this stage.”
The report of the Fact-Finding Committee on the North-East Delhi Riots of February 2020, constituted by the Delhi Minorities Commission, observed that incendiary speech by Mr. Mishra
was the inception point of triggering clashes. In the following three days, mobs spread across the district, targeting a particular community and raising slogans derogatory to that community, reported The Wire. [10]
In the communal violence, 53 people lost their lives, hundreds were injured and property worth hundreds of crores were destroyed.
Notably, it added, “the speech of Kapil Mishra made on 23 February 2020 as well as other speeches and statements inciting violence against anti-CAA protesters have been ignored.”
Hate Speech: A Toolkit For Propaganda and Vote Gathering
When the media becomes a slave of authority, it is easy to run a one-sided narrative, leaving no space for alternative thinking. In a democratic regime where the ruling party turns rulers, it becomes suffocating for challenging thoughts to crop up. Sold media outlets allow politicians to rant hate against vulnerable groups without reigns. The political ecosystem, as such, provides leeway for political parties to peddle their lies and run their agendas disguisedly as if they care for us and think about us!
In the end, what they are worried about is vote banks.
Chairman of the International Network Against Cyber Hate (INACH) Philippe Schmidt said, in an interview with the Stockholm Center for Freedom, shed light on how normalizing the use of hate speech is digging the grave for social sanctity, how governments look for scapegoats and throwing them under the bus for their failure, how media ignores the vulnerable. [11]
He says when political parties and politicians normalize the use of hate speech in their speeches to attract voters, it impacts their voters and sets an example for them, showing them that it is normal to talk about certain groups and people in such ways.
It is the role of the media to counter the lies and misinformation on social media. It is their work to burst conspiracy theories.
He said, “when social media platforms enable hate speech to exist and flourish when there is no real effort by the media to counter misinformation and conspiracy theories, and when we as a society accept that we all live in a separate bubble where everyone has their own truth, those are circumstances that make it easy for hate speech to flourish because it does not get corrected.”
He said normalizing discrimination affects the everyday lives of those people who are a target of it. The most vulnerable to discrimination are minorities like LGBTQ+, immigrants, and Jews in the European setup. In India, they can be people from Muslim and Sikh communities, Dalits, who often face communal colored remarks.
Excerpt From The Interview:
“What are some of the groups in society most vulnerable to hate speech? This changes depending on the period. However, minorities are one group that is always targeted. Minorities today could be LGBTQ+, immigrants, or Jews, so basically, anybody who belongs to a group can be discriminated against. For instance, women are not a minority but they are easier to discriminate against. These groups will also, of course, change in different countries. Even if some countries have the same minorities, how they are targeted may not be the same.
Jews in France, for example, would more likely be victims of anti-Semitic hate crimes than racial discrimination. People from North Africa and black people would more likely be victims of racial discrimination.”
Rise In Cases Filed Under Sec 153A Between 2014-2020:
Cases filed under Indian Penal Code Section 153A (promotion of enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, and language) increased almost six times between 2014 and 2020, according to the National Crime Records Bureau data.
In 2014, only 323 cases were lodged under Section 153-A, which increased successively to 1804 in 2020.
In 2018, 1076 cases were filed, slightly higher than 1058 cases in 2019 and lower than no. of cases registered in 2017.
2020 registered the most no. of cases at 1804 cases, with a 70% increase compared to 2019.
State-wise Data: Top States That registered Highest Cases under IPC 153A & 153AA
The highest number of cases booked under Section 153A & 153AA were from Tamil Nadu at 303, followed by Uttar Pradesh at 243, Telangana (151), Assam (147), and Andhra Pradesh at 142 in the year 2020.
Data Image: Scroll
References:
- Collins English Dictionary, Harper Collins Publishers: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/hate-speech#:~:text=in%20American%20English-,noun,religion%2C%20gender%2C%20or%20sexual%20orientation
- Merriam- Webster Dictionary: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hate%20speech#:~:text=hate%20speech-,noun,%2C%20national%20origin%2C%20or%20disability
- The United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech: https://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/understanding-hate-speech/what-is-hate-speech#:~:text=In%20common%20language%2C%20%E2%80%9Chate%20speech,that%20may%20threaten%20social%20peace
- The United Nations data: https://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/historical-background.shtml
- Making Violence Ordinary: Radio, Music, and the Rwandan Genocide, McCoy Jason, International Library of African Music, African Music 8, no. 3, 2009, pp 85-96.
- The Hindu: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/hate-speeches-complete-menace-we-want-free-and-balanced-press-in-india-sc/article66374675.ece
- Article 19 of the Indian Constitution https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1218090/
- Spiral of Silence. Peterson, Thomas. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2nd January, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/topic/spiral-of-silence
- The Indian Express: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/anurag-thakur-slogan-rithala-rally-6238566/
- The Wire: https://thewire.in/communalism/delhi-riots-kapil-mishra-minority-commission-report
- Stockholmcf.org interview: https://stockholmcf.org/interview-economic-downturns-have-a-great-impact-on-the-rise-of-hate-speech-inach-chairman-schmidt-says/
This article is co-authored by Zaheena Naqvi and Harshita Sharma