The Freedom of Speech Dilemma

The Supreme Court's ruling asking comedians on India's Got Latent to apologise opens up a debate on commercial speech and its restrictions

- By SAMIDHA JAIN

THE SUPREME COURT IN AUGUST directed standup comedian Samay Raina, host of the YouTube show India's Got Latent, and four other comedians, to issue unconditional public apologies on their social media platforms. It was in response to them mocking individuals with disabilities and rare genetic disorders, including spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), on their show.

WHAT WAS THE TRIGGER?

After the episode was aired, the SMA Cure Foundation, a nonprofit organisation, approached the Supreme Court with a petition against the comedians, accusing them of making insensitive and dehumanising jokes. As part of its ruling, the court observed that, while freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it cannot be invoked to justify content that is commercial in nature and simultaneously infringes upon the dignity and sensitivities of vulnerable communities. The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi emphasised that humour must not cross the line, particularly when it is monetised and disseminated to large audiences.

The apex court also directed the Union government to submit proposed draft guidelines for regulating content on social media platforms. The guidelines, the court said, must strike a balance between protecting freedom of expression and ensuring such freedoms are not misused to demean or marginalise any section of society.

WHAT IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH?