Hate crimes happen due to lack of political will, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday blamed lack of political will for the rise in hate crimes. Terming attacks on north Indians in Mumbai by Raj Thackeray’s Maharashtra Navnirnan Sena as a ‘serious matter,’ the Supreme Court said that the problem of regional chauvinism and hate attacks should be tackled by the government.

“Can it be done through an order of this court? It is a political question and not a court issue. If there is political will, it can be tackled,” a bench comprising Justice B N Agarwal and Justice G S Singhvi said.

The court on November 10 will hear a PIL seeking direction to the government to deal with the violence against north Indians in Mumbai. The bench was initially not inclined to entertain the petition filed by businessman Salek Chand Jain, and said that it was for the Centre to invoke Article 355 for giving appropriate direction to the concerned state.

However, later it observed that the “issue was serious” and agreed to hear the matter directing for amending the petition. The petition was mentioned before the bench by counsel Sugriv Dubey.

Mr Dubey said that the attacks on north Indian by MNS has led to a chain reaction elsewhere in the country threatening to destroy the unity and integrity of the country.

According to the petitioner, following the MNS attacks , the Jharkhand chief minister had announced that he would not permit mineral resources of the state to be transported to any part of the country. He claimed the threat, if carried out, would seriously affect the country’s development as 60% of the mineral resources originated from Jharkhand.

Pointing towards the attack on Maharashtra Sadan in the Capital by protesters on Monday, the petitioner justified the argument that if stern action was not taken against those espousing regional chauvinism it would seriously endanger upon the country’s unity and development.

“But can an order of this court have the desired effect? You educate the people,” the bench told the counsel to which the latter replied that most of the victims are not well educated people.

The apex court at one stage questioned the locus standi of the petitioner but his counsel said the developments have a bearing on him as being a businessman he would not be able to trade with other states if regional sentiments were whipped up every where.

The bench made the counsel to read Article 355 of the Constitution which mandated that it was the duty of the Centre to protect states against external aggression and internal disturbances.

According to Article 355 of the Constitution , “it shall be the duty of the Union to protect every state against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every state is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution”.

“It is serious matter (violence) dealt in a non- serious manner,” the bench observed while referring to the petition which did not contain details of the various incidents. The court asked the counsel to amend the petition and posted it for hearing on Monday.