Heckler’s veto cannot be allowed- petitioner tells Supreme Court

Heckler’s veto cannot be allowed- petitioner tells Supreme Court

Subject :Polity

Section: Constitution

• Wearing a hijab in the street does not offend public order, but can schools not intervene to maintain public order if a student wears it to school, the Supreme Court asked on September 8, 2022.
• To this, senior advocate DevadauttKamat, appearing for AishatShifa, a student from Karnataka who was banned from entering her classroom wearing a hijab,said schools have no say in deciding public order.
• Maintaining public order is the responsibility of the State, Mr. Kamat contended.
• What is Heckler’s veto?
  • If anyone wear a headscarf and someone is offended and shouts slogans, the police cannot turn to that person and say not to wear hijab. That will be called the heckler’s veto.

Arguments given for wearing Hijab by advocate:

• Whether the government can restrict speech and expression of honest beliefs and choices merely on the possibility of a violent reaction by hecklers.
• It is the State’s obligation to protect belief as long as it does not violate public order, health or morality.
• Asking how a display of “honest belief” by wearing hijab affects any of the three criteria.
• The state can’t restrict practices even though it may not be part of essential religious practice, as long as it do not hamper public order, health or morality.
• Just because other people can get offended is not a ground for prohibiting someone from wearing a hijab
• To make a Muslim student choose between education and the hijab was a violation of Article 19 (freedom of expression).

Constitutional Provisions

Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression, provides every citizen with the right to express one’s views, opinions, beliefs, and convictions freely by word of mouth, writing, printing, picturing or in any other manner.

Article 19(2) confers the right on the State to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the freedom of speech and expression on the grounds of,

• Sovereignty and integrity of India,
• Security of the state,
• Friendly relations with foreign states,
• Public order, decency or morality,
• Contempt of court, defamation, and incitement to an offence.

Article 25: says that all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.

• Freedom of conscience: Inner freedom of an individual to mould his relation with God or Creatures in whatever way he desires.
• Right to Profess: Declaration of one’s religious beliefs and faith openly and freely.
• Right to Practice: Performance of religious worship, rituals, ceremonies and exhibition of beliefs and ideas.
• Right to Propagate: Transmission and dissemination of one’s religious beliefs to others or exposition of the tenets of one’s religion.
• Article 25 covers religious beliefs (doctrines) as well as religious practices (rituals).
• Moreover, these rights are available to all persons—citizens as well as non-citizens.
• These rights are subject to public order, morality, health and other provisions relating to fundamental rights.
• The State is permitted to regulate or restrict any economic, financial, political or other secular activity associated with religious practice.