Criminalisation of Lying: Bangladesh Perspective
Mahbubul Alam Toha :
Most of the people claim that they are virtuous, have strong morality, do not harm others, and have no bad characteristics. Unfortunately, the reality is somewhat different, for the vast majority of people have some in moral aspects that is forbidden in any circumstances. Lying, which is the subject of this writing, is something to which people pay little attention. They feign ignorance when others lie and regard themselves as innocent when they do it. This is a characteristic of a large section of people. Throughout the world, large numbers of people from every social sector lie from their early years onward for a variety of reasons: to put on a show for others, out of pride, to make others laugh, to ensure a profit for themselves, to protect themselves, and to slander and harm others. The average person does not kill, rob, or rape, but she/he does lie, and she/he lies often. Friends lie to friends to be polite; students lie to their professors about missed assignments; husbands lie to their wives about their whereabouts when in fact they are having affairs; we even lie that we feel fine when we do not. However, they do not consider doing so a sign of serious immorality, even though all religions have strictly forbidden it and state that liars will be compensated with Hell in the afterlife. Some laws has been enacted to punish for it by the countries as well.
What is lying? A long-standing and powerful moral principle is that lying is a wrongful conduct. It is a form of deception. Lying is giving some information while believing it to be untrue, intending to deceive by doing so. It has three essential features:
A lie communicates some information.
The liar intends to deceive or mislead.
The liar believes that what he is saying not true.
A renowned American legal scholar Steven Morrison has developed a useful classification of lies. His classification of six types of lies ranging in order from the most serious (and least justifiable) to least serious(and most justifiable) are: 1. Lies that harm another person or entity; 2.Lies that benefit the liar; 3. Lies that benefit another person or entity; 4. Lies that avoid harm to the liar; 5. Lies that harm only the liar and 6. Lies that are designed to avert harm to another person or entity.
The above categories of lying show that a single law cannot be designed to deal equal treatment to them all. Morrison goes so far as to state that if the role of the criminal law is to maximise society’s happiness and safety as well as achieving efficiency, then lies in categories two to six should not be criminalised. If a lie confers a benefit, reduces a harm for anyone, or both, it should be encouraged and even celebrated. It is clear from Morrison’s classification scheme that not all lies are identical in terms of the harm they produce. Thus, lying should not be criminalised generally save for exceptional and narrow circumstances.Indeed, we must proceed with extreme legislative caution. Every effort should be made to delineate minimally the context in which lies can be made criminal. Lies should only be criminalised if they are intended to cause harm and if said, results harm.
The idea that it is wrong to lie-the refrain of every scolding mother and perhaps the first moral truth learned by each of us as a child. To properly contextualise the subject, it must begin by examining its moral dimensions. For this, some preliminary mapping of the philosophical landscape underpinning lying is required. Philosopher Arnold Isenberg has proffered a definition that a lie is “a statement made by one who does not believe it with the intention that someone else shall be led to believe it.” While lying is widely condemned as wrong, the reasoning behind this moral prohibition differs dramatically. Leading arguments contend that lying is either an absolute wrong in itself, or that the harm that it engenders is severe enough as to warrant its prohibition. These divergent views are represented by the two warring camps of deontology and consequentialism: the first focuses upon the act itself, the latter, and the consequences that flow from the act.
Christian theologian St. Augustine (354-430) taught that lying was always wrong, but accepted that this would be very difficult to live up to and that in real life people needed a get-out clause.
Thomas Aquinas also thought that all lies were wrong, but that there was a hierarchy of lies and those at the bottom could be forgiven. His list was: Malicious lies: lies told to do harm. Malicious lies are mortal sins. Jocose lies: lies told in fun. These are pardonable. Officious or helpful lies. These are pardonable.
The strictest deontological theories hold that lying is an intrinsic wrong. Both St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, inspired by Aristotle, maintained that lying is contrary to the laws of nature.
Hobbes and Rawls has put forward an inventive linguistic argument against lying. This follows from the notion that a lie distorts the reasoning process of the victim, interfering with his/her rational deliberation; the lie robs one of his/her ability to make rational choices concerning his/her beliefs and course of conduct-it is an assault on his/her integrity as an individual.
There is no religion that supports lying. All religion described it as a great sin.One of the greatest errors is for people to act according to their own logic, or to the value judgments widespread in their society, which often is far from Islam, and not to the logic prescribed by Allah in the Qur’an. Lying is the most prominent behavior of this type.
Interestingly, most people who come into contact with a liar know when he or she is lying, but do not bother to expose the lies. In other words, they allow the liar to continue spreading his or her lies. Lying is a secret language among people, one about which most of the people remain silent.
Throughout the Glorious Quran, Allah Almighty spoke in 100s of Noble Verses about the liars and deceivers, and promised them Hell Fire for their evil: “And, do not cloak (and confuse) the truth with falsehood. Do not suppress the truth knowingly.” (2:42)
“No vanity shall they hear therein (in Heaven), nor lying.” (78:35)
Narrated by Abu Bakr (RA), Allah’s Apostle said thrice:
“‘Shall I not inform you of the biggest of the great sins?’ We said “Yes, O Allah’s Apostle”…….And I warn you against giving forged statements and a false witness; I warn you against giving forged statements and a false witness ‘. The Prophet kept on saying that till we thought that he would not stop ” (Sahih al-Bukhari)
The Bible says, “But no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.” (James 3:8)
The present laws on lying: (1). Tort Law:
a. Misrepresentation and false pretenses can create civil liability if it results in a pecuniary loss. Though this financial injury may take a variety of forms. A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact that the victim relies upon to her detriment. False pretenses somewhat related to the tort of misrepresentation is the statutory offense of false pretenses, which concerns defrauding an individual of their property.
b. Lying is addressed in other forms in tort as well. Defamatory statements can incur tortious liability in the form of slander or libel. Defamation is the public issuance of a false statement about another party that results in the other party suffering some sort of harm. A defamatory statement is one that is “calculated to injure the reputation of another, by exposing them to hatred, contempt or ridicule.
In many jurisdictions, defamation is a crime as well as a civil wrong. Along with substantial fines, the criminal liability can be quite serious. For instance, under German law, defamation is a criminal offense; an offender can be sentenced to a prison term of up to five years. Under Canadian criminal law, a person who knowingly publishes false, defamatory libel is subject to a prison term of up to five years.
In many authoritarian regimes anti-defamation law is used as an instrument of political control or to silence journalistic dissent.Imprisonment for defamation is common place across much of Asia and the Middle East, where it is frequently used by governments for political purposes.
2. Contract Law: Lying can of course incur liability in contract law in the form of misrepresentation. Depending upon the type of misrepresentation, the injured party can rescind the contract; sue for damages, or both.
3. Criminal Law:Of greatest relevance to this Article, however, is that in certain contexts lying is a crime. It has been briefly touched on criminal defamation above; however, the criminalisation of lies is not confined merely to defamation. Under English criminal law, deception is a crime in certain circumstances. Early English law was merely concerned with threats aimed at the public at large and so punished only specific categories of deception, such as forgery and the use of false weights and measures. It will be discussed again in the eye of the law of Bangladesh.
Lying in the law of Bangladesh: The Penal Code of 1860 describes the law relating to lies: According to section-499,”Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or published any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation or such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person. Section 500 also describes that”Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
Section 501 says that”Whoever prints or engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
Information and Communication’s Technology Law, 2006 describes that “Any person who willfully published or broadcasted anything in the Website or any other electronic format, and whichever considers the status of the false and obscene or fall, seen or heard from corrupt or dishonest or which may be motivated by a defamation occurs, deterioration of law and order, or the likelihood that tarnish the image of the state and the person or hurt the religious sentiments then it will be considered as crime.” [Section- 57(1)]. “If anybody commits an offense under this sub-section 1 he or she will be in imprisonment for a term [not exceeding fourteen years and not less than seven years], and shall be punished with a fine not exceeding one crore.” [Section- 57(2)]
To conclude, it can be said that the criminalisation of lying within the private context would be a challenging case for any country. Though the Constitution of Bangladesh guaranteed the freedom of thought and speech but in reality we have seen in recent years that some people have been arrested and punished for giving status in the Facebook which was defamatory to the political leaders of the land.
(Advocate and Human rights activist (Studying Bar-at-law) E-mail: [email protected])
Most of the people claim that they are virtuous, have strong morality, do not harm others, and have no bad characteristics. Unfortunately, the reality is somewhat different, for the vast majority of people have some in moral aspects that is forbidden in any circumstances. Lying, which is the subject of this writing, is something to which people pay little attention. They feign ignorance when others lie and regard themselves as innocent when they do it. This is a characteristic of a large section of people. Throughout the world, large numbers of people from every social sector lie from their early years onward for a variety of reasons: to put on a show for others, out of pride, to make others laugh, to ensure a profit for themselves, to protect themselves, and to slander and harm others. The average person does not kill, rob, or rape, but she/he does lie, and she/he lies often. Friends lie to friends to be polite; students lie to their professors about missed assignments; husbands lie to their wives about their whereabouts when in fact they are having affairs; we even lie that we feel fine when we do not. However, they do not consider doing so a sign of serious immorality, even though all religions have strictly forbidden it and state that liars will be compensated with Hell in the afterlife. Some laws has been enacted to punish for it by the countries as well.
What is lying? A long-standing and powerful moral principle is that lying is a wrongful conduct. It is a form of deception. Lying is giving some information while believing it to be untrue, intending to deceive by doing so. It has three essential features:
A lie communicates some information.
The liar intends to deceive or mislead.
The liar believes that what he is saying not true.
A renowned American legal scholar Steven Morrison has developed a useful classification of lies. His classification of six types of lies ranging in order from the most serious (and least justifiable) to least serious(and most justifiable) are: 1. Lies that harm another person or entity; 2.Lies that benefit the liar; 3. Lies that benefit another person or entity; 4. Lies that avoid harm to the liar; 5. Lies that harm only the liar and 6. Lies that are designed to avert harm to another person or entity.
The above categories of lying show that a single law cannot be designed to deal equal treatment to them all. Morrison goes so far as to state that if the role of the criminal law is to maximise society’s happiness and safety as well as achieving efficiency, then lies in categories two to six should not be criminalised. If a lie confers a benefit, reduces a harm for anyone, or both, it should be encouraged and even celebrated. It is clear from Morrison’s classification scheme that not all lies are identical in terms of the harm they produce. Thus, lying should not be criminalised generally save for exceptional and narrow circumstances.Indeed, we must proceed with extreme legislative caution. Every effort should be made to delineate minimally the context in which lies can be made criminal. Lies should only be criminalised if they are intended to cause harm and if said, results harm.
The idea that it is wrong to lie-the refrain of every scolding mother and perhaps the first moral truth learned by each of us as a child. To properly contextualise the subject, it must begin by examining its moral dimensions. For this, some preliminary mapping of the philosophical landscape underpinning lying is required. Philosopher Arnold Isenberg has proffered a definition that a lie is “a statement made by one who does not believe it with the intention that someone else shall be led to believe it.” While lying is widely condemned as wrong, the reasoning behind this moral prohibition differs dramatically. Leading arguments contend that lying is either an absolute wrong in itself, or that the harm that it engenders is severe enough as to warrant its prohibition. These divergent views are represented by the two warring camps of deontology and consequentialism: the first focuses upon the act itself, the latter, and the consequences that flow from the act.
Christian theologian St. Augustine (354-430) taught that lying was always wrong, but accepted that this would be very difficult to live up to and that in real life people needed a get-out clause.
Thomas Aquinas also thought that all lies were wrong, but that there was a hierarchy of lies and those at the bottom could be forgiven. His list was: Malicious lies: lies told to do harm. Malicious lies are mortal sins. Jocose lies: lies told in fun. These are pardonable. Officious or helpful lies. These are pardonable.
The strictest deontological theories hold that lying is an intrinsic wrong. Both St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, inspired by Aristotle, maintained that lying is contrary to the laws of nature.
Hobbes and Rawls has put forward an inventive linguistic argument against lying. This follows from the notion that a lie distorts the reasoning process of the victim, interfering with his/her rational deliberation; the lie robs one of his/her ability to make rational choices concerning his/her beliefs and course of conduct-it is an assault on his/her integrity as an individual.
There is no religion that supports lying. All religion described it as a great sin.One of the greatest errors is for people to act according to their own logic, or to the value judgments widespread in their society, which often is far from Islam, and not to the logic prescribed by Allah in the Qur’an. Lying is the most prominent behavior of this type.
Interestingly, most people who come into contact with a liar know when he or she is lying, but do not bother to expose the lies. In other words, they allow the liar to continue spreading his or her lies. Lying is a secret language among people, one about which most of the people remain silent.
Throughout the Glorious Quran, Allah Almighty spoke in 100s of Noble Verses about the liars and deceivers, and promised them Hell Fire for their evil: “And, do not cloak (and confuse) the truth with falsehood. Do not suppress the truth knowingly.” (2:42)
“No vanity shall they hear therein (in Heaven), nor lying.” (78:35)
Narrated by Abu Bakr (RA), Allah’s Apostle said thrice:
“‘Shall I not inform you of the biggest of the great sins?’ We said “Yes, O Allah’s Apostle”…….And I warn you against giving forged statements and a false witness; I warn you against giving forged statements and a false witness ‘. The Prophet kept on saying that till we thought that he would not stop ” (Sahih al-Bukhari)
The Bible says, “But no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.” (James 3:8)
The present laws on lying: (1). Tort Law:
a. Misrepresentation and false pretenses can create civil liability if it results in a pecuniary loss. Though this financial injury may take a variety of forms. A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact that the victim relies upon to her detriment. False pretenses somewhat related to the tort of misrepresentation is the statutory offense of false pretenses, which concerns defrauding an individual of their property.
b. Lying is addressed in other forms in tort as well. Defamatory statements can incur tortious liability in the form of slander or libel. Defamation is the public issuance of a false statement about another party that results in the other party suffering some sort of harm. A defamatory statement is one that is “calculated to injure the reputation of another, by exposing them to hatred, contempt or ridicule.
In many jurisdictions, defamation is a crime as well as a civil wrong. Along with substantial fines, the criminal liability can be quite serious. For instance, under German law, defamation is a criminal offense; an offender can be sentenced to a prison term of up to five years. Under Canadian criminal law, a person who knowingly publishes false, defamatory libel is subject to a prison term of up to five years.
In many authoritarian regimes anti-defamation law is used as an instrument of political control or to silence journalistic dissent.Imprisonment for defamation is common place across much of Asia and the Middle East, where it is frequently used by governments for political purposes.
2. Contract Law: Lying can of course incur liability in contract law in the form of misrepresentation. Depending upon the type of misrepresentation, the injured party can rescind the contract; sue for damages, or both.
3. Criminal Law:Of greatest relevance to this Article, however, is that in certain contexts lying is a crime. It has been briefly touched on criminal defamation above; however, the criminalisation of lies is not confined merely to defamation. Under English criminal law, deception is a crime in certain circumstances. Early English law was merely concerned with threats aimed at the public at large and so punished only specific categories of deception, such as forgery and the use of false weights and measures. It will be discussed again in the eye of the law of Bangladesh.
Lying in the law of Bangladesh: The Penal Code of 1860 describes the law relating to lies: According to section-499,”Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or published any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation or such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person. Section 500 also describes that”Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
Section 501 says that”Whoever prints or engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
Information and Communication’s Technology Law, 2006 describes that “Any person who willfully published or broadcasted anything in the Website or any other electronic format, and whichever considers the status of the false and obscene or fall, seen or heard from corrupt or dishonest or which may be motivated by a defamation occurs, deterioration of law and order, or the likelihood that tarnish the image of the state and the person or hurt the religious sentiments then it will be considered as crime.” [Section- 57(1)]. “If anybody commits an offense under this sub-section 1 he or she will be in imprisonment for a term [not exceeding fourteen years and not less than seven years], and shall be punished with a fine not exceeding one crore.” [Section- 57(2)]
To conclude, it can be said that the criminalisation of lying within the private context would be a challenging case for any country. Though the Constitution of Bangladesh guaranteed the freedom of thought and speech but in reality we have seen in recent years that some people have been arrested and punished for giving status in the Facebook which was defamatory to the political leaders of the land.
(Advocate and Human rights activist (Studying Bar-at-law) E-mail: [email protected])