Supreme Court asks Centre and States to take a strict stance on hate speech

The Supreme Court on Friday emphasised that “freedom comes with enormous responsibility” in a statement on the “unfortunate” impact of TRPs and the rivalry to write “sensational” headlines. A group of petitions calling for a stop to hate speech occurrences across the nation and claims of “misreporting and sensationalism” in the media were being heard by a bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna.

Supreme Court asks Centre and States about their stand on regulation of “sensational” reporting

The National Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) was informed by the bench that it is their responsibility as a regulatory agency to uphold fundamental human dignity.

Remarked justice KM Joseph ” TV is a very powerful medium. Particularly for young people, you influence and create divisions in society very quickly,”.

The Center and the states have also been questioned by the court on their stance on the control of “sensational” reporting and leaders’ recurrent hate speech.

Further Justice Joseph commented “We don’t like the idea of government regulations on the media but this is a question of the unity of the country,”

The central government was represented by ASG KM Nataraj, who gave the court the assurance that the required changes to the CrPC and IPC to permit the prosecution of hate speech cases are also in the works.

Also Read: Supreme Court on CAA says will first decide on constitutional validity of Citizenship Act’s Section 6A

Supreme Court expresses displeasure on Centre’s stand on Hate Speech

“We are bringing key amendments to the present CrPC. We are contemplating some significant amendments. It’s a consultative process and will take a certain time,” the ASG stated that the consultation process will take some time.

The National Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) has also been questioned by the bench over the actions taken against media outlets and TV hosts who report with bias, exaggerate stories, or provide “one-sided information.”

The court further commented on the “undignified” language used in media reports of the recent Air India incident in which a man is accused of urinating on another passenger.

Justice Joseph tells the counsel for the NBSA “There was a recent case of a man peeing on a plane. What kind of name was he called on the channels?

He is undertrial and human dignity is involved. You as a regulatory body must ensure that basic human dignity is maintained,”.

Also Read: TV channels driven by agenda: Supreme Court

Keep watching our YouTube Channel ‘DNP INDIA’. Also, please subscribe and follow us on FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, and TWITTER.