​Playing to the gallery: on the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025 Politics & News

​

Good intentions do not necessarily lead to good outcomes, and it is important to recall this lesson of history in the context of the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025. Its pious objectives are more likely to lead to unintended horrors against free speech and individual liberty, and blatant misuses of state power. The intent of the proposed law is to define and penalise hate speech and hate-motivated acts that incite disharmony, hatred or violence against individuals or groups based on various protected characteristics. The corrosion of public spaces in free societies is indeed troubling, and governments, policymakers and the citizenry are justifiably concerned about this. Individuals and communities are targeted for their religion, race, sexual orientation, caste and gender through public platforms, particularly social media. There is a certain impunity from law that purveyors of hatred are guaranteed. They are often rewarded with political power and social influence. Starting with prejudice against fellow humans, hate speech is fuelled by misinformation and fake news oftentimes. Speech, prejudice and hatred create a vicious cycle, sometimes leading to violence against groups and individuals. Karnataka has more than its share of all these, and the State government must have thought that a specific law is the way to tackle this.

Such attempts around the world are creating more problems than they resolve. Restriction of speech on any ground is a bad idea, and when an agent of the state is authorised to determine what is allowed and what is not, it is a slippery slope. A case in point is how law enforcement in several western countries cracks down on peaceful pro-Palestinian speech as anti-Semitic. Most of the attributes that such laws, including the proposed one in Karnataka, are trying to define are indefinable concepts such as harmony, hate, enmity and ill will. All agree in principle that no one should spread hate or prejudice, and they go on to accuse opponents of doing it. Considering the inescapable subjectivity in this determination, the powerful prevail. The Bill defines hate speech as any expression (spoken, written, visual, electronic) made in public view to deliberately cause injury, disharmony, enmity, hatred, or ill will against a person or group with a prejudicial interest, which is so sweeping and totalitarian that the risk of misuse will be manifold compared to any social good that can be achieved through this. The only reason why speech ought to be controlled in a free society is the imminent threat of violence, and existing laws are more than enough to tackle such situations. The Karnataka government is playing to the gallery. And it is playing with fire.