A recent report finds that hate crimes including hate speech against religious minorities such as Muslims and Christians have attained an institutional character due to the outward and tacit support of State authorities.
—
A recent report by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, a non-profit and non-governmental organisation, has confirmed 72 reported incidents of hate crimes (55) and hate speech (17) against religious minorities in the first quarter of 2024 in India.
The Union government is empowered to notify religious minorities under Section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. As per it, Muslims (14.2 percent), Christians (2.3 percent), Sikhs (1.7 percent), Buddhists (0.7 percent), Jains (0.4 percent) and Zoroastrians (0.006 percent) have been notified as religious minorities.
As per the report, the violence against religious minorities in India has now attained an “institutional character”. This is because it is carried out by State actors frequently, and where non-State actors are the perpetrators, they do so with the open and tacit support of State officials and agencies.
As per the report, the alleged primary factor behind the incidents was the religious identity of the victim, provocations during religious processions and celebrations of festivals.
What is the framework for hate speech?
The report does not use the word ‘hate speech’ which is defined by the UN Strategy and Plan of Action as “any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender and other identify factors”.
Also read: Will the judiciary watch silently as the ECI abdicates responsibility to curb hate speech by the PM?
It should be noted that there is no universal definition of hate speech under international human rights law.
Hate speech is carried out by State actors frequently, and where non-State actors are the perpetrators, they do so with the open and tacit support of State officials and agencies.
The report rather uses the term ‘hate crime’ which encompasses hate speech as well. As per the report, hate crime is a criminal act committed against individuals because of their race, religion, colour, national origin, sexual orientation or other personal traits.
Calls to violence are outlawed under various statutes in India, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. Hate speech incidents could be tackled Sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, etc) and 295A (outraging religious feelings) of the IPC and under the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Reasons behind the incidents
As per the report, the religious identity of the victim is a major reason behind the incidents. The report finds that 83.3 percent reported victims of hate speech violence are male, while only 16.7 are female.
In one reported incident, a 13-year-old Muslim boy was attacked with a knife because of his religious identity in the Muravpura area of Jaipur. In the first information report (FIR) registered by the local police, it was stated that religious slurs had been used against him by a group of boys.
Since December 2021, Muslim girls have been barred from entering their pre-university in Udupi, Karnataka. On February 5, 2022, the Karnataka government issued a Government Order stating that all government schools will follow a prescribed dress code.
The hijab ban eventually led to the closure of many educational institutions indefinitely and in some cases created serious safety concerns for Muslim female students who were attacked for wearing hijabs.
When the aggrieved Muslim girl students approached the Karnataka High Court, the court upheld the ban. When it was challenged before the Supreme Court, they gave a split verdict on October 13, 2022.
Eventually, the new government led by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah last year indicated his willingness to withdraw the ban. While the status of the ban remains unknown, a report by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties has found that more than 400 Muslim female students were denied entry or were suspended as a consequence of the hijab ban.
While many female students changed their schools, or dropped out, some of them lost their academic year while waiting for the Supreme Court to form a larger Bench to hear their grievances.
In January 2023, the Hindu College in the Moradabad district of Uttar Pradesh denied entry to Muslim female students cladded in the hijab and burqa. The students alleged that the college administration had compelled them to remove their headscarves at the university entrance.
The report also finds that there is a growing phenomenon where religious festivals are increasingly becoming weaponised by Hindutva groups to target religious minorities. In a growing number of cases, the identity of the victim is grouped along with the celebrations of festivals and religious processions taken out during festivals.
For instance, during the consecration of the Ram Temple at Ayodhya, there were nine incidents of violence reported on January 22, 2024 as per the report. The consecration was followed by large-scale processions and celebrations across the country. Six incidents of violence were reported after the consecration.
The alleged primary factor behind the incidents of hate speech is the religious identity of the victim, provocations during religious processions and celebrations of festivals.
Similarly, around the Holi festival in March, seven incidents of violence were reported. In Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, a Muslim man along with his sister and mother were returning from a doctor’s visit when they were harassed by a mob of men celebrating Holi.
In a video that went viral on social media, the mob was heard saying: “This is a 70-year old tradition. Don’t you know by now that this will happen if you come to Badi Bazar?”
It has been reported that the Hindu mob tried to beat the man when he resisted the attack. The men also tried touching his mother and sister inappropriately and raised Hindu religious chants such as “Har Har Mahadev” and “Jai Shree Ram”.
Following the circulation of the video, the local police registered a case under various sections of the IPC. One of the assailants was identified as Aniruddha while the three others were minors. They were eventually arrested.
In another reported case, a Muslim auto-rickshaw driver was brutally assaulted and beaten and colour was forcefully applied on him by a group of Hindus celebrating Holi in a gated colony ‘Champaner Society’ in Ahmedabad. The group after learning the identity of the rickshaw driver allegedly set his auto-rickshaw on fire and shouted Islamaphobic slurs.
Apart from these factors, other alleged motivations that continue to be a driving force behind violence and hate speech are religious conversions, cow slaughter and disputes over places of worship.
Also read: Recalling Dr Ambedkar’s prescient vision of 1945 against calls for boycott of minorities
On February 8, Haldwani Municipal Corporation demolished Maryam Masjid and Abdul Razzaq Zakariya Madrasa in Banbhoolpura locality in an anti-enroachment drive. As a consequence, clashes broke out between police officials and locals following which a curfew and shoot-at-sight orders were imposed by the government.
Reportedly, seven people were killed, 31 were arrested and over 90 were detained. The local police registered an unnamed FIR against 5,000 individuals. However, the estimates of those killed and injured are much higher than the State’s estimate, the report suggests.
The fact-finding report by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights has found that the demolitions were carried out in the backdrop of the “land jihad” propaganda in Uttarakhand.
The state government led by Chief Minister Pushkar Dhami and radical right-wing groups have constantly created divisive discourse in the name of protecting Uttarakhand’s “devibhoomi” (land of the gods).
Last year, on May 26, two youths, one Hindu and another Muslim, were involved in the abduction of a minor Hindu girl in Purola block of Uttarkashi district. Although the police registered an FIR under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012, the incident was given a communal makeover by the Devbhoomi Raksha Abhiyan (DRA), a right-wing Hindu group. It circulated posters across the district asking Muslims to leave the town.
The DRA even called a Hindu mahapanchayat for the protection of “sisters, daughters and ancestral heritage” against Muslims. As a consequence, 44 shops belonging to Muslims were closed. Posters threatening “love jihadis” with dire consequences if they do not vacate their shops were found in Purola block and Barkot.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh affiliated Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and its young-wing Bajrang Dal, and Bhairav Sena supported these anti-Muslim protests. Reportedly, they sent a letter to the Tehri district magistrate giving an ultimatum to the ‘people of a particular community’ to leave Jaunpur Ghati (valley) and certain towns of Uttarakhand.
The report finds that 83.3 percent reported victims of hate speech violence are male, while only 16.7 are female.
According to the letter, “members of a particular community are continuously roaming around the villages in the garb of ragpickers, ice cream sellers etc. Due to which, the threat to our beti, choti, and roti as well as the heritage of our ancestors is constantly rising.”
Previously, Hindu Yuva Vahini had organised a dharam sansad on December 19, 2021 in Delhi where hate speeches calling for organised violence against Muslims were made.
A similar event was organised from December 17–19, 2021 by Yati Narsinghanand in Haridwar. However, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy in Shaheen Abdulla versus Union of India & Ors (2022) directed police and authorities to immediately and suo moto register cases against hate speech even if a complaint is not filed.
The Order highlighted that Sections 153A, 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 505 (statement inducing to public mischief) and 295A of the IPC can be invoked to book hate mongers.
Any violation of these directions will attract contempt, the court’s Order stated. In furtherance of this, an FIR against the organiser was registered and a chargesheet has been filed. In many of the states including Uttarakhand, anti-religious conversion laws have been introduced.
Also read: 2024 ‘critical year’ for hate speech in India, warns new report
Since 2014, instances of cow lynching have increased exponentially in BJP-ruled states as per the statistics by IndiaSpent database, which records cow vigilantism violence. The data indicates that about 97 percent of such incidents have been reported since the BJP came to power in 2014.
These attacks are often carried out by far-right groups such as the VHP, Bajrang Dal and local gau rakshak samitis (cow protection committees). A significant number of victims involve Dalit and Muslim men.
In 2018, Tehseen Poonawalla and Tushar Gandhi filed public interest litigations seeking directions from the Supreme Court for the Union and state governments to deal with the issue of cow violence. One of the issues raised before the court was that many cow protection legislations allowed individuals to take action in case of violation of any provisions.
The legislation gave immunity from any criminal prosecution if such actions were taken in good faith, for instance, Section 14 of The Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. The court, however, did not go into the constitutionality of the provisions and focused on implementing preventive measures.
A Bench of former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Mishra and comprising A.M. Khanwilkar and the present CJI Dr D.Y. Chandrachud pronounced its judgment on the matter on July 17, 2018.
It issued extensive preventive and remedial measures to the Union and state governments. State governments are required to designate a senior police officer, not below the rank of superintendent of police, as the nodal officer in each district. The nodal officer shall be assisted by one officer of the rank of deputy superintendent of police in the district to take measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
The police were directed to register a FIR under Section 153A of the IPC along with relevant provisions against persons who disseminate “irresponsible and explosive messages and videos of having content which is likely to incite mob violence and lynching of any kind.”
One of the important directives was for the Union and state governments to broadcast on radio, television and other media platforms including official websites that lynching and mob violence of any kind would invite serious consequences under the law.
The report also finds that there is a growing phenomenon where religious festivals are increasingly becoming weaponised by Hindutva groups to target religious minorities.
For remedial measures, the court directed the police to immediately register an FIR if an incident occurs and provided that the nodal officer must be duly informed.
The court also directed state governments to prepare a lynching or mob violence victim compensation scheme in light of Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure within one month from the date of the judgment.
Five years have passed since the judgement was pronounced and there are still legitimate concerns about compliance with the directions. Last year, the Union government informed the Supreme Court that 28 states have appointed nodal officers. Only last year did states such as Madhya Pradesh have approved a victim compensation scheme.
In all these reported incidents, hate crimes could be categorised as physical violence and incidents of harassment that may not give rise to physical violence.
The highest number of incidents reported is that involving physical assault (15) followed by cases of intimidation and harassment (13) and attacks on property (5). Whereas, several incidents involving a combination of the categories were also reported. This showcases the multifaceted nature of hate crimes.
Who contributes to hate speech?
As per the report, political leaders (56 percent) are the primary contributors to hate speeches in India followed by religious leaders (22 percent). The medium used to make hate speeches are public gatherings and rallies, press conferences and assembly sessions.
In a reported incident, BJP Leader of the Opposition in West Bengal assembly Suvendu Adhikari called a Sikh police officer in Bengal “Khalistani”.
During the northeast Delhi communal violence in the backdrop of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, (CAA), 2019 and the proposed National Register for Citizens (NRC) on February 23, 2020, it has been reported that the protests coincided with the Delhi assembly elections where alleged hate speeches and divisive narratives were made against anti-CAA protestors by BJP legislators Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma.
In one of the rallies, Thakur instigated the participants to raise incendiary slogans. When he said, “Desh ke gaddaron ko (the traitors of the country), the crowd responded “goli maaro saloon ko (shoot them).” Gaddar was apparently a reference to the anti-CAA protestors.
The crowd’s response was a throwback to the statement first made by Mishra during a pro-CAA march in the city’s Connaught Place on December 20, 2020 when Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was imposed.
On February 23, 2020, Mishra called a pro-CAA rally at Maujpur traffic signal, close to Jafrabad metro station where at least 500 people were staging protest against the CAA and gave a three-day ultimatum to the Delhi police to remove the protestors blocking the traffic at Jafrabad and nearby roads. He warned that he would not let another ‘Shaheen Bagh’ be created in Delhi. In the evening, stone pelting incidents were reported near Maujpur.
Also read: Will the judiciary watch silently as the ECI abdicates responsibility to curb hate speech by the PM?
BJP leader and member of Parliament from West Delhi, Parvesh Verma used another favourite trope of the Hindu Right, the alleged treatment meted out to Kashmiri Pandits by Kashmiri Muslims to rile up the crowd against the protestors. He said, “They will enter your house … abduct your sisters and mothers, rape them, kill them the way militants had treated Kashmiri Pandits.”
The men also tried touching his mother and sister inappropriately and raised Hindu religious chants such as “Har Har Mahadev” and “Jai Shree Ram”.
He added, “Lakhs of people gather there (Shaheen Bagh) and this fire can anytime reach households of Delhi… People of Delhi need to think about it and decide… That’s why today is the moment.”
Conclusion
There are no systematic efforts made to record or document the ever-increasing widespread hate crimes against religious minorities.
While atrocities against Dalits are recorded under the Schedule Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, there is no similar legislative framework for other religious minorities.
The findings of the report have also corroborated the report of Washington-based India Hate Lab. Last year, on May 1, the United States Department of State released an annual report on the status of religious freedom in India, titled India 2022 International Religious Freedom Report. The report extensively tabulated incidents of violence in 2022 against religious minorities in India, including killings, assault and intimidation.
In a reported incident, BJP Leader of the Opposition in West Bengal assembly Suvendu Adhikari called a Sikh police officer in Bengal “Khalistani”.
The report found discriminatory practices to which members of religious minority communities are subjected. It quoted the Freedom in the World report that rated India as ‘partly’ free on account of the “discriminatory policies and the rise in persecution affecting the Muslim population”.
The report by India Hate Lab has warned 2024 to be a ‘critical year’ for hate speech in India.
