Twelve petitioners, including former Delhi LG Najeeb Jung, have urged the Supreme Court to issue guidelines against discriminatory remarks by public officials, arguing they violate constitutional morality even if not criminal hate speech.
Twelve petitioners have moved the Supreme Court seeking guidelines against discriminatory remarks made by public officials and constitutional functionaries, contending that such statements violate constitutional morality and undermine the values of the Constitution. The petitioners include former Delhi LG (Lieutenant Governor) Najeeb Jung, philosophy professor and activist Roop Rekha Varma and political activist John Dayal.
Plea Cites Remarks by Senior Officials
The plea refers to specific remarks made by senior public officials in recent years. These include statements attributed to Assam Chief Minister (CM) Himanta Biswa Sarma who allegedly encouraged people to keep giving trouble to Muslims and misattributed words to the Supreme Court to justify such remarks. It also flags the Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami's alleged repeated references to "land jihad" and "love jihad" along with Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath's alleged "kathmulla" remarks in the Assembly. Additionally, the plea mentions comments by Maharashtra minister Nitesh Rane allegedly terming Muslims as "Pakistani pimps", "green pigs" and "snakes" along with remarks by National Security Adviser Ajit Doval allegedly exhorting the youth to "avenge history". The petition notes that nearly 30 such statements have been identified during the course of its research.
Violation of Constitutional Morality Argued
The plea argues that while political actors may propagate ideological positions, constitutional functionaries, holders of public office and executive administrators are bound by the Constitution to act with fairness and restraint. It contends that even statements that may not amount to hate speech under criminal law can still violate constitutional morality and should therefore be impermissible for those holding public office.
Petition Seeks Guidelines, Not Punishment
Clarifying its scope, the petition states that "the Petition does not seek to limit free speech or seek punishments for hate speech," but seeks "guidelines, either on court's examination or through a dialogic exercise, for public officials, constitutional functionaries and executive administrators to follow constitutional morality in their conduct and practices.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)