3 ms·

You may want to check out the Indian supreme court opinion on the topic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wi

You may want to check out the Indian supreme court opinion on the topic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_India

Barrin92 6y ago
Other than one dissenting view in 2014, that page indeed does document decades of enforcement of the Indian penal code, which is very clear, and cited on that page. "Whoever (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity, . . . shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both." That is without a doubt very explicit and much further reaching than any European legislation. And from the cases actually given in that article also practised as such. Just to take one example, but there are many more in that very article In 2007, R.V. Bhasin's Islam - A Concept of Political World Invasion by Muslims was banned, and house raided, in Maharashtra on grounds that it outrages the feelings of Muslim section of society.[12][13][14] In January 2010, the Bombay High upholds the ban imposed by the Government of Maharashtra.[15]
- will4274 6y ago
  It wasn't a dissenting view, it was the court opinion. And citing events from before that precedent isn't so relevant to today's laws.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    In that case, the wikipedia article also gives examples follwing that opinion >On 20 September 2016, a blogger named Tarak Biswas was arrested for criticising Islam under Section 295A and 298, besides 66, 67 and 67A of the IT Act after a complaint about hurting religious sentiments was lodged by Sanaullah Khan, a Trinamool Congress leader.[39] On 25 February 2018, two people were arrested for allegedly making derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi, UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath, and Hindu gods. Four people were booked under section 295-A.[40] Contrary to what you seem to believe a single decision in 2014 has shockingly enough not upended India's entire framework on legislating hate speech, that is not how the law works.
    - will4274 6y ago
      Are India's high court precedents not binding? It's certainly how law works in the United States that when the high court rules that a law violates the constitution, that law is struck.

You may want to check out the Indian supreme court opinion on the topic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_India

Barrin92 6y ago

Other than one dissenting view in 2014, that page indeed does document decades of enforcement of the Indian penal code, which is very clear, and cited on that page. "Whoever (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity, . . . shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both." That is without a doubt very explicit and much further reaching than any European legislation. And from the cases actually given in that article also practised as such. Just to take one example, but there are many more in that very article In 2007, R.V. Bhasin's Islam - A Concept of Political World Invasion by Muslims was banned, and house raided, in Maharashtra on grounds that it outrages the feelings of Muslim section of society.[12][13][14] In January 2010, the Bombay High upholds the ban imposed by the Government of Maharashtra.[15]

will4274 6y ago
It wasn't a dissenting view, it was the court opinion. And citing events from before that precedent isn't so relevant to today's laws.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  In that case, the wikipedia article also gives examples follwing that opinion >On 20 September 2016, a blogger named Tarak Biswas was arrested for criticising Islam under Section 295A and 298, besides 66, 67 and 67A of the IT Act after a complaint about hurting religious sentiments was lodged by Sanaullah Khan, a Trinamool Congress leader.[39] On 25 February 2018, two people were arrested for allegedly making derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi, UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath, and Hindu gods. Four people were booked under section 295-A.[40] Contrary to what you seem to believe a single decision in 2014 has shockingly enough not upended India's entire framework on legislating hate speech, that is not how the law works.
  - will4274 6y ago
    Are India's high court precedents not binding? It's certainly how law works in the United States that when the high court rules that a law violates the constitution, that law is struck.