Today(on 9th May),Supreme Court petition urges Election Commission to tackle hate speeches during election campaigns, particularly by BJP members. Former ex-IAS officer and Professor from Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, among petitioners.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on 9th May), A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court urging the Election Commission of India (ECI) to address hate speeches made during election campaigns, particularly those made by members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The petitioners in this case consist of a former ex-IAS officer who held positions as Secretary in the Union Ministries of Power and Finance, along with a Professor and former Dean of the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore.
The plea highlights specific instances of hate speech that have occurred. It points out that on April 21, 2024, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting, as well as Youth Affairs and Sports, Anurag Singh Thakur, made speeches demonizing and stereotyping the Muslim community. These speeches were disseminated through various mediums across the country.
Furthermore, on April 30, 2024, the Bharatiya Janata Party shared an animated video on its official Instagram account, echoing the hate speech used by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on April 21. This video was subsequently reposted by party members. Another similar video was uploaded on May 6, 2024, on X (formerly Twitter) by Shri Arvind Dharmapuri, a sitting Member of Parliament belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party from Nizamabad, Telangana.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Fails to Hear Petitions on Hate Speech as Scheduled
The petition, represented by Advocate on Record Anas Tanwir, emphasizes that according to Article 324 of the Constitution, the Election Commission has the exclusive and unchallengeable authority to uphold the paramount objective of ensuring free and fair elections.
However, the plea highlights the disparity in the Election Commission’s actions. While directives were issued to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and other opposition parties, no such notices were issued to the BJP.
The plea states-
“The Election Commission of India issued directives to the Aam Aadmi Party, requiring modifications to their campaign anthem over perceived implications against the Bharatiya Janata Party and the judiciary. Additionally, Shri K. Chandrasekhar Rao, Founder of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi, was prohibited from campaigning following alleged derogatory remarks against the Indian National Congress. Notably, these actions were initiated suo motu by the Election Commission.”
Based on these grounds, the petition requests the Court to direct the ECI to take action against BJP members for violations of the Model Code of Conduct. Additionally, the plea seeks a direction for the Commission to conduct an investigation into the hate speeches made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Minister Anurag Singh Thakur.
The petitioners argue that it is crucial for the Election Commission to address hate speeches during election campaigns to maintain the integrity of the electoral process and ensure a level playing field for all political parties. By taking appropriate measures against those who engage in hate speech, the ECI can uphold the principles of free and fair elections, which are fundamental to democracy.
The Supreme Court, known for its commitment to upholding the rule of law and protecting the democratic values of the nation, will now review the petition and assess the merits of the case. The outcome of this petition has the potential to set an important precedent regarding the accountability of political leaders and parties in India when it comes to hate speech during election campaigns.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Declines Individual Hate Speech Cases, Focuses on Systemic Mechanism
In India, a country renowned for its diversity and pluralism, promoting communal harmony and social unity is essential. Responsible and inclusive political discourse is crucial. Hate speech, which perpetuates stereotypes, vilifies communities, and fosters division, is incompatible with a robust democratic system. The Supreme Court’s intervention in this matter will be instrumental in effectively addressing and curbing hate speech, thereby safeguarding the democratic integrity of the nation.
CASE TITLE:
Dr. Emani Anantha Satyanarayana Sarma & Anr v. Election Commission of India
