Role Of Speech In Politics

Abstract

This research project is about, hate speech, right to freedom of speech & expression, present landscape of hate speech in politics and role of media in this. The research proves that there is a rise in hate speech during elections. Many political leaders are accused of giving hate speeches during elections just to gain the sympathy of their vote bank. But they forget that it may end up in apathy in the society. In many cases, people get involved just to get the limelight. The research further explores why hate speech mongers go unpunished. There is an important point which need to be mentioned that hate speeches which do not get noticed and punished are a greater threat to

The security of state means legislature can enact laws which would impose restrictions on expressions which endanger the security of the State and is intended to overthrow the government or wagering a war against the government. Public order means public peace, safety and tranquility of the people at large. The absence of public order is an aggravated form of disturbance of public peace, which affects the general life of the public. Any speech which intends to disturb public order can be restricted by enacting laws. The decency and morality includes the state can put restriction on forms of expression if they are considered to be indecent, immoral or obscene. The Supreme Court in India while deciding whether the novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover contained obscene material, upheld the Hicklin Test. The contempt of court concerned with the laws enacted by the legislature which restrict the exercise of one’s right of freedom of speech and expression if it interferes with due course of justice or lowers the authority or stature of justice or lowers the authority or stature of the court. Although criticism of the judicial system or judges is not restricted, it must not impair or hamper the administration of justice. Defamation is an intentional false statement either published or publicly

Where do I draw the line between these two things?

It is not so easy technically, just like one cannot tell what exact moment the line is between day and night. This is pretty much personal call. But if one was to define a generic understanding of where is the line, he would say that any free speech becomes hate speech the moment anyone's expressions and supporting actions during so called free speech threaten and or antagonize the existence of party being made fun of.

One can keep n number of opinions judgmental about others, express them as disapproval but the moment one denies their right to exist in its own world, he is hate speech. For example, I dislike hizab, its Hindu version 'pallu', for personal reason on views about women. It is in my right to free speech to share why I think what I think and appreciate those who agree with me, but the moment I become so aggressive in myself righteousness that I declare all those who don’t agree with me are either Satan or Demon or backstabbers or apostates etc, I am threatening right of others to live in their world, I am denying peaceful co- existence. Same thing applies to people who would promote