Constitutional experts are unanimous that there are ample provisions in the Indian Penal Code and other laws for initiating action against the Thackerays for their hate speeches and writings that divide the people of Maharashtra.
The former Attorney-General, Ashok Desai, reckons that there are several legal weapons in the armoury, but the State government will have to use them cautiously. The Thackerays, he says, are trying to break up the nation by whipping up hatred and linguistic chauvinism.
Section 153 (A) of the IPC provides for action against promoting enmity among different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence and language, and against acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony. Though normally action is taken under this provision, it will be more appropriate to invoke Section 153 (B), which talks about “imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration.”
Mr. Desai says arousing hatred against different sections is tantamount to questioning national integration. What the Thackerays are making is “hate speech,” which threatens the country’s unity. This amounts to dividing people on the basis of their language. Section 153 B will be ideal for taking action in such cases, as whoever makes a statement which may cause disharmony or spark enmity or hatred shall be punished with imprisonment for up to three years.
Union Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal says the Shiv Sena leaders’ speeches are anathema to the basic premises of the Constitution, which provides for the citizens to go to any place for gainful employment. Senior counsel K.K. Venugopal says if the hate speeches are not nipped in the bud, linguistic groups in each State will claim right to exclude people from every other part of India. The State governments should not allow such groups making claims on a regional or linguistic basis to mar the country’s unity and integration.
Centre may also act
Senior advocate K. Subramanian says the best thing to do is for the Election Commission to de-register the Shiv Sena as a recognised State party on the ground that the speeches by its leaders go against national unity and integration. The Centre may also consider banning it under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
Another senior advocate C. S. Vaidyanathan, echoing Mr. Subramanian’s views, says these groups, by making hate speeches, are trying to divide society on parochial considerations. The State government has enough power to take action.
According to T.R. Andhyarujina, a senior advocate, it is true there are enough legal provisions, but initiating action against the leaders may also become counter-productive. If the police control the cadre and stop it from indulging in looting or arson, sooner or later these speeches will die down; otherwise the leaders will become heroes.
