Hate-Speech Accused 3 Times More Successful In Elections
Candidates with hate-speech cases against them were three times more successful in elections compared to those without a criminal record, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of self-disclosed crime records of candidates who have contested various elections nationwide over the last 12 years.
To put these data in perspective, over the last 12 years, 10% of candidates with no criminal cases won elections, while the figure was 20% for candidates with criminal cases of any kind.
As many as 70 members of Parliament (MPs) and members of legislative assemblies (MLAs) have hate-speech cases pending against them, according to their own disclosures to the Election Commission (EC) of India.
A season of hate speeches by politicians—including union ministers, MPs and MLAs—is underway across India, riven by inflamed, opposing views on nationalism and free speech.
Some recent examples:
Members of Parliament
Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs)
Political party chiefs
How “hate speech” is identified, numerous laws in force
“Hate speech” currently has no specific legal definition, although the Law Commission has been tasked by the Supreme Court to do just that.
There are several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that pertain to hate speech, including:
- 153(A)—statements aimed at creating enmity related to communal, racial, linguistic, ethnic and descent;
- 153(B)—statements against sovereignty;
- 295(A)—statements aimed at hurting religious feelings;
- 505(2)—statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes; and
- Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act—promoting enmity between classes in connection with elections.
BJP has given tickets to most number of candidates with “hate-speech” cases
As many as 399 candidates with “hate-speech” cases have been fielded by political parties in various parliamentary and state assembly elections over the last 12 years. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leads the list with 97 candidates.
How political parties violate their oath given to ECI at the time of registration
Each political party, at the time of registration, has to provide a self-sworn oath to the EC, declaring that the party will adhere to the principles of "socialism, secularism and democracy".
A party must provide a copy of memorandum of rules, which should contain a specific provision—drawn from Representation of the People Act, 1951—that says “….and such memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.”
By giving tickets to candidates with “hate-speech” cases, political parties in a way violate their self-sworn oath to the EC.
(Manoj K is a graduate of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, and the founder of the Centre for Governance and Development. He has a special interest in transparency and accountability in governance and has spearheaded several projects on these subjects.)
Correction: The headline and first two paragraphs of this story have been reworded to remove statements of causality, evident in the original copy. We thank readers for pointing this out and regret the misleading manner in which the original copy was worded.
We welcome feedback. Please write to email@example.com. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.
Liked this story? Indiaspend.org is a non-profit, and we depend on readers like you to drive our public-interest journalism efforts. Donate Rs 500; Rs 1,000, Rs 2,000.