The Supreme Court on Tuesday verbally observed that political parties must foster fraternity and adhere to constitutional morality, reported Live Law.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices BV Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a writ petition seeking guidelines to prevent “constitutionally unbecoming” speeches by government representatives.
The plea was filed by a group of 12 citizens, including former civil servants, diplomats, academicians and members of civil society.
It came against the backdrop of recent speeches by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and a now-deleted social media post by the BJP’s Assam unit. The post contained a video depicting Sarma symbolically firing at images of two Muslim men at close range.
During the hearing, Kant observed that the petition appeared to be “definitely targeted against a particular individual” as it referred only to Sarma’s speeches, Live Law reported. He held that some individuals had been “chosen selectively”, “conveniently ignoring others”.
“This is not acceptable,” Live Law quoted Kant as saying. “They [the petitioners] should be fair.”
Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, clarified that no specific relief was being sought against Sarma and said references to him would be deleted.
He also urged the court to examine the broader constitutional issue, the legal news outlet reported.
“We need to do something,” Live Law quoted Sibal as saying. “This is becoming very toxic. This petition is not qua any individual.”
The chief justice suggested that the petitioners withdraw their plea and file a fresh application focused on constitutional principles. “Let the petitioners not create an impression that they are against a particular party or individual,” Live Law quoted Kant as saying.
Nagarathna also remarked that “there should be restraint from all sides”.
“Political leaders must ultimately foster fraternity in the country,” Live Law quoted Nagarathna as saying.
Sibal agreed to modify the petition. He also submitted that problematic speeches are often made before the Model Code of Conduct comes into force, but continue to circulate online during elections.
The Election Commission will not act since the speeches were made before the elections were declared, the advocate was quoted as saying.
The code is a set of guidelines issued by the Election Commission for candidates, political parties and governments to follow during an election. It sets guardrails for campaign events, speeches, election manifestos and other aspects of the polls.
Sibal urged the court to consider laying down guidelines, including for media and online platforms.
The petitioners have sought a declaration that public speeches made in an official or quasi-official capacity must conform to constitutional morality and the values of equality, fraternity and secularism as well as Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
Article 14 guarantees the right to equality and Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
The petitioners also asked the court to frame guidelines governing such speeches without imposing any restraint on the right to free speech.
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to entertain petitions seeking a first information report against Sarma for hate speech against Muslims.
A bench headed by Kant had told the petitioners to approach the Gauhati High Court and directed it to hear the matter on priority.
Petitions seeking action against the Bharatiya Janata Party leader were filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Communist Party of India leader Annie Raja.
In the past month, Sarma has made a series of remarks targeting Bengali-origin Muslims in Assam, calling them “Miyas”. The Assam chief minister had said that it was his job to “make them suffer”.
In Assam, “Miya” is a derogatory word used to refer to undocumented immigrants and is exclusively directed at Muslims of Bengali origin. They are often accused of being undocumented migrants from Bangladesh.
Once a pejorative in Assam, from the common use of the honorific “Miya” among South Asian Muslims, the term has now been reappropriated by the community as a self-descriptor to refer to Muslims who migrated to Assam from Bengal during the colonial era.
Just 0.2% of readers pay for news. The others don’t care if it dies. You can help make a difference. Support independent journalism – join Scroll now.
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!