There are other instances when the harm principle has been invoked but where it is more difficult to demonstrate that rights have been violated.For example, hate speech. Most liberal democracies have limitations on hate speech, but it is debatable whether these can be justified by the harm principle as formulated by Mill. One would have to show that such speech violated rights, directly and in the first instance. (I am interested here in hate speech that does not advocate physical violence against a group or individual. If it does, it would, like the corn dealer example, be captured by Mill 's harm principle as speech that can be prohibited).
Censorship is the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, that are considered obscene, politically acceptable, or a threat in security. Censorship is the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society. This action is caused whenever individuals succeed in imposing their political or moral values on others by suppressing words, images, or ideas that they find offensive. The use of censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.
morality is to be determined with reference to the probable effects it may have upon the audience to which it is addressed. Decency and morality indicates a certain standard of behavior prevailing in society. Something which is offensive to modesty and decency is excluded from the constitutional protection by the constitution itself. Obscenity has been made an offence in India and various acts other that Indian Penal Code, like Indecent Representation of Women, Cinematograph Act have been centre around this idea of obscenity and public morality to promote decency and morality. The Supreme Court of India has explained the term obscenity in the light of morality by applying the Hickin Test.
Such acts are forbidden and punishable by law. The notion that acts such as murder, rape and theft are to be prohibited exists worldwide. What precisely is a criminal offence is defined by criminal law of each country. While many have a catalogue of crimes called the criminal code, in some common law countries no such comprehensive statute exists. The state (government) has the power to severely restrict one 's liberty for committing a crime.
I will attempt to justify that John Stuart Mills approach to the argument of Freedom of Speech is the most valid, and the only instance where expression should be limited is where it causes an immediate harm or violation to the rights of others. I believe that expression should be limited when it causes harm to others or violates their rights. This view coincides with J.S Mill’s “Harm Principle”. I do not believe that hate speech should be prohibited as it merely offensive, not harmful to the rights of others. Unless of course, this expression is inciting violent or illegal behaviour, or threatening others, in which case it is directly harmful and should therefore be prohibited.
This Sedition Act is to criminalise any questioning on citizenship (Part 3), national language (Article 152), special position of Malays and the rights of other races (Article 153) and the Rulers’ sovereignty (Article 181) of the Federal Constitution. This act also limited the freedom of expression especially sensitive politic issue. What is seditious tendency? A seditious tendency is defined in section 3 as someone that bring hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government; someone that seek alteration other than lawful means of any matter by law established; someone that
The print and electronic media have gone into fierce and ruthless competition, as we call them ‘aggressive journalism’. The most reckoning research on the positive and negative aspects of media trial has been elaborated in 200th report of the Law Commission entitled Trial by Media: Free Speech vs. Fair Trial Under Criminal Procedure (Amendments to the Contempt of Court Act, 1971) that has made recommendations to address the damaging effect of sensationalized news reports on the administration of justice. While the report has yet to be made public, news reports indicate that the Commission has recommended prohibiting publication of anything that is prejudicial towards the accused — a restriction that shall operate from the time of arrest. It also reportedly recommends that the High Court be empowered to direct postponement of publication or telecast in criminal cases. The report noted that at present, under Section 3 (2) of the Contempt of Court Act, such publications would be contempt only if a charge sheet had been filed in a criminal case.
Introduction Criminal law is the branch of the national law that defines certain forms of human conduct as crimes and provides for the punishment of those persons with criminal capacity who unlawfully and with a guilty mind commit crimes. For conduct to have taken place there had to have been a positive act or an omission (failure to do something). There is no general duty for an individual to act, but depending on the legal convictions of the community, there may be criminal liability for a failure to act. In determining to which extent criminal law should reflect the values and general agreement of the community we bring rise to various policy considerations, the relevance of the Bill of Rights and its effect on our Constitution. Where
HATE SPEECH LAWS IN INDIA: A Need for a Fine Distinction WORD COUNT: 4,963 WORDS (MAIN ARTICLE EXCLUDING FOOTNOTES) I. ABSTRACT Hate speech, loosely defined, refers to any word, written or spoken, designated to incite the feeling of animosity amongst different classes or strata’s of the society. In India, there are several laws that govern the usage of Hate speeches, which historically developed to prevent hurting the religious sentiments of different communities coexisting in a secular state such as India. The legislation against hate speeches can be seen in the form of various Sections of IPC such as 153A, 295A etc along with the constitutional discourse confined in Article 19(2). Section 153A state about written statements, Section 295A states about deliberate attempt to hurt religious sentiments. The historical development starts with Mahashe Raj pal Vs Emperor case and was upheld by Supreme Court in sucessive cases.
Any conduct which is calculated to bring a court or a judge into contempt or to lower his authority or to interference with the lawful process of the court is called contempt of court. In most cases, the judge has the power to punish any contempt by individuals or organizations under Art 126 of the Federal Constitution. This is to protect the administration of justice from undue interference and to maintain the dignity authority of the judge. In the case of Attorney General, Malaysia v Manjeet Singh Dhillon , English common law principle of contempt of court is applicable under Section3 of Civil Law Act 1956. Contempt of court may be divided into civil contempt and criminal contempt.