Judge: Free Speech Needs Tolerance of Criticism

A former Supreme Court judge just made a powerful case for protecting free speech, even when it stings.

Justice Abhay Oka told a Mumbai audience this week that preserving freedom of expression requires learning to tolerate criticism. Speaking at the Loksatta Tarun Tejankit awards ceremony, which honored 22 young achievers, he emphasized that democracy cannot survive without dissent and lawful protest.

The message comes at a crucial time. Justice Oka pointed to recent incidents where poetry, humor, and art have been blamed for inciting hatred, suggesting society hasn't developed the intellectual maturity expected after 75 years of constitutional democracy.

He shared an encouraging example of progress. A law student recently refused to delete a social media post critical of a court ruling, invoking constitutional free speech protections. Despite initial pushback from university authorities, no action was taken.

Justice Oka called this outcome rare but hopeful in the current climate.

The former judge didn't shy away from criticizing his own institution. He stated that the Supreme Court's decision to ban an NCERT textbook was inappropriate. He also emphasized that while criticism of judicial decisions is essential to free speech, it must be constructive and well researched.

Why This Inspires

This story matters because it shows leaders modeling the very tolerance they're asking citizens to practice. Justice Oka argued that fundamental values shouldn't appear so fragile that creative expression threatens them. Courts must adopt a more tolerant approach toward criticism, he said, quoting British jurist Lord Denning's warning against using contempt powers to protect personal prestige.

His framework for evaluating speech offers a path forward. The impact of words should be judged from the perspective of a rational, balanced individual, not someone overly sensitive to opposing views.

Justice Oka reminded the audience that safeguarding constitutional values is every citizen's duty, though it's often overlooked. When citizens fall short, the judiciary bears crucial responsibility for protecting freedoms, especially expression, while accepting that society must judge its performance.

True respect for free speech will come only when it's fully accepted as a fundamental freedom by all, not just protected on paper.