New Delhi, January 3
Disagreeing with the majority verdict, Justice BV Nagarathna said a minister’s disparaging statement could be vicariously attributed to the government, if made in his official capacity.
She said only if a stray remark made by the minister was not consistent with the stand of the government, it could be treated as his personal remark. She said it was for the party to control the speeches made by their ministers, which could be done by forming a code of conduct.
Noting that the freedom of speech and expression was a necessary right for ensuring a healthy democracy, Justice Nagarathna also voiced concern over hate speech, saying “it struck at the foundational values of our Constitution”. “Hate speech strikes at the foundational values of the Constitution by marking society as unequal. It also violates the fraternity of citizens from diverse backgrounds. The sine qua non (essential condition) of a cohesive society is based on plurality and multiculturalism such as India that is ‘Bharat’. Fraternity is based on the idea that citizens have reciprocal responsibilities towards one another,” she said.
She said indiscreet speech was a cause for concern in recent times as it was hurtful and insulting. Public functionaries and other persons of influence, including celebrities, were duty-bound to be more responsible and restrained in their speech, Justice Nagarathna said. “They are required to understand and measure their words having regard to the likely consequences on public sentiment and behaviour and also be aware of the example they are setting on the fellow citizens to follow.
