Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: Criminal Defamation, Law Commission
Mains level: Read the attached story
Introduction
- The 22nd Law Commission has recommended retaining criminal defamation as an offence in the new legal framework of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- The Law Commission’s report highlights the importance of protecting an individual’s reputation, grounded in Article 21 of the Constitution, which safeguards the right to life and personal liberty.
Key Recommendations: Upholding Reputation
- Invisible Asset: Reputation, a valuable asset, cannot be seen but is diligently built over a lifetime and can be tarnished in an instant.
- Essence of Protection: The jurisprudence around criminal defamation laws is rooted in the essence of safeguarding one’s reputation.
- Balancing Act: While acknowledging that criminal defamation might seem contradictory to freedom of speech and expression, the Law Commission suggests treading carefully.
- Harmful Speech: The Commission advises that speech should only be deemed illegal when it intends substantial harm, and when such harm becomes a reality.
What is Criminal Defamation?
- Defamation: Defamation entails the act of publishing damaging content that diminishes an individual’s or entity’s reputation, from the viewpoint of an ordinary person. In India, defamation is both a civil and criminal offense.
- Sections 499 and 500: These sections in the Indian Penal Code address criminal defamation. Section 499 defines the offense, while Section 500 outlines the associated punishment.
Arguments in Favor of Retaining Criminal Defamation
- Protection of Reputation: An individual’s reputation, an integral part of Article 21, is as vital as free speech.
- Balancing Act: The right to free speech (Article 19(1)(a)) must be balanced against the right to reputation (Article 21).
- Inadequate Compensation: Monetary compensation in civil defamation may not proportionately compensate for reputation harm.
- Editorial Responsibility: Editors bear the responsibility for published content, with significant consequences for individuals and the nation.
- Counteracting Online Defamation: In the absence of an effective internet censorship mechanism, criminalizing defamation is a necessary safeguard.
- State’s Interest: Criminalizing defamation is part of the state’s compelling interest to protect citizens’ dignity and reputation.
Arguments against Retaining
- Chilling Effect: Criminal defamation may have a chilling effect on free speech, with a lower threshold for prosecution than civil damages.
- Media Freedom: Freedom of speech and media expression is crucial for vibrant democracies, and the threat of prosecution can stifle truth.
- Misinterpretation of Dissent: Dissent may be misconstrued as unpalatable criticism, leading to imprisonment under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC.
- Collective Reputation: The right to reputation cannot extend to collectives like the government, which can rectify reputational damage.
- Redundancy: Since civil defamation remedies exist, retaining criminal defamation may serve little purpose except coercion and harassment.
- Global Trend: Many nations, including neighbouring Sri Lanka and the UK, have decriminalized defamation.
- International Perspective: The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights urges states to abolish criminal defamation as it intimidates citizens and deters exposing wrongdoing.
Conclusion
- Criminal defamation cases have been used to suppress investigative journalism, hindering democratic accountability.
- Criminal defamation should not be misused by the state, especially as the Code of Criminal Procedure gives public servants an advantage.
- Interim measures can ensure fair proceedings and prevent excessive penalties.
Back2Basics: Law Commission of India
Details | |
Establishment | An executive body established by the Government of India, with the first commission established in 1955. |
Tenure | Each Law Commission serves a term of three years. |
Function | Acts as an advisory body to the Ministry of Law and Justice for legal reforms in India. |
Recommendations | The recommendations made by the Law Commission are not binding. |
Historical Background | The first Law Commission was established during the British Raj in 1834 by the Charter Act of 1833. |
First Chairman | The first Chairman of the Law Commission was Macaulay, who recommended the codification of laws. |
Composition | Typically consists of a full-time Chairperson, full-time Members, ex-officio Members, and part-time Members. |
Terms of Reference | Undertakes research and reviews of existing laws, recommends reforms, and studies justice delivery systems. |
Major Reforms | The Law Commission played a pivotal role in suggesting key enactments like the Indian Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code. |
Role in Legal Reforms | Serves as both an advisory and critical body, with its recommendations often influencing legal reforms in India. |
Supreme Court References | The Supreme Court has referred to the work of the Law Commission and followed its recommendations in various cases. |
Promotion of Accountability | Aims to promote an accountable and citizen-friendly government, transparency, and the right to information. |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024