Defining the Scope of Hate Speech: A Comparative Jurisprudential Approach

Abstract

The concept of hate speech has been in debate for many years, and it has received immense attention in the recent past. With the advent of the internet, the content is reaching more swiftly to the audience than ever before, having greater implications. Laws have been enacted both in the international and national spheres to regulate the menacing effect of hate speech. Nevertheless, such antihate speech laws have been continuously challenged as they violate the right to free speech and expression. Supra-national courts like the European Court of Human Rights as well as the courts in other democracies have considered various aspects and tried building up jurisprudence in this regard. India is no exception to such phenomena and has witnessed a surge in such incidents in recent times. Wherein in many cases, the State has turned blind eye to the serious ramification that such speeches were capable of, in other instances, it has incarcerated people indiscriminately, accusing them of making speeches amounting to sedition. Prohibition against hate speech has found references in various laws and the judiciary has long played a pivotal role through balancing acts. Besides defining ‘hate speech’, this research paper has attempted sketching the limits of hate speech by reconciling Indian jurisprudence with the ones developed by the courts abroad.