Can ECI ignore hate speech? Kerala HC demands accountability

Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala High Court on Friday questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) on the consequences when a political candidate makes hate speech or communal remarks that may harm a community, society, and the nation.

The court’s remarks came during the hearing of a plea alleging inaction by the ECI against B Gopalakrishnan, the BJP candidate from Guruvayur assembly constituency, over an allegedly communal campaign video.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas disposed of the petition, directing the ECI to consider and pass appropriate orders on a March 20 representation submitted by the petitioner, KSU leader Gokul K, within two months of receipt.

During proceedings, the ECI informed the court that a First Information Report (FIR) had been registered against Gopalakrishnan following a complaint by the Returning Officer, and the controversial campaign video had been removed.

However, the court raised concerns about the broader impact, asking: “What about the harm caused to a community, the society and the country? What happens when someone makes such hateful or communal comments?”

The court further criticised the apparent suspension of government functions during the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) period, noting that statutory duties and court directives are often delayed on this pretext. The ECI responded, clarifying that the MCC only prevents any political party from gaining unfair electoral advantage and does not bar the commission from executing statutory responsibilities.

Also Read| Kerala Assembly Polls 2026: 890 candidates in fray for April 9 election

In his plea, Gokul stated that despite submitting a representation to the ECI on March 20, no action had been taken against the BJP candidate, prompting judicial intervention.

Gopalakrishnan has been booked under sections 192 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot) and 125 (promoting enmity between classes in connection with an election) of the Representation of the People Act.

The disputed campaign video reportedly featured Gopalakrishnan claiming that the Guruvayur constituency had not elected a “Hindu MLA” for nearly five decades and alleged that both the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) had neglected candidates from the community.

PTI