Amid debates over social media regulation sparked by Ranveer Allahbadia’s remarks, a deeper question arises: should society adopt a clearly defined moral code?

While the nation discusses the desirability of regulating content on social media given the controversy that erupted from the statement made by YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia, there is a larger issue of defining morality and enacting moral patterns of conduct for people that requires prior consideration.

While it remains open whether Allahbadia’s statement violated any provision of law, however, it is obvious that his statement hurt the moral sentiments of a majority of the population. Notwithstanding, the undesirability of his statement, how advisable it is to expect people to behave in a way that is morally acceptable to society when no particular pattern of ethically correct behaviour is prescribed for them by the state. It implies that society expects or presumes everyone to know morally accurate conduct in all situations.

As morality is an abstract concept that varies from place to place and from person to person, it is necessary that, like law, morality is clearly defined as well. Usually, an act or statement acquires a righteous or erroneous character on the personal sense of judgement of individuals, thus, people must know clearly what is permissible moral and what is proscribed immoral.

In such a situation, it requires consideration whether society needs a code that prescribes a pattern of morally upright conduct for its people.    Ideally, each society must aim to be free from immoral conduct or behaviour and, for this, the state should establish a pattern or standard of behaviour that is expected of all the citizens and is followed by all alike whether individuals or organisations.

Ironically, in India, the state has made little attempt to establish such a society where people follow a certain advised pattern of behaviour that is acceptable to all.

The impression that laws would serve this purpose is completely contrary to the practical realities. Laws as they exist in this country are mostly proscriptive which means they largely prohibit particular or specific behaviour(s) rather than laying down in detail the desirable pattern(s) of conduct.

In India, laws are hardly prescriptive and they do not necessarily prescribe a particular pattern of behaviour for people. Generally, laws do not provide in brief or detail what manner, pattern of conduct or behaviour should people observe or practice.

They mainly proscribe or prohibit particular conduct(s) and make doing such conduct culpable or punishable and the doer of it liable for certain consequences. Given such a situation, does it not sound farcical to expect all the people, all over, to know, in every situation, in minute details, what is legally and morally permissible conduct and behaviour?     

The lack of efforts on the part of the society or the state to formulate a code of morally desirable conduct in India may be ascribed to the thought that this work be better left to the educational, religious or cultural institutions.

But if so, have such institutions fulfilled their responsibility in this regard? India, being a multi-religious and multi-cultural country, a variety of factors seem to hamper this purpose. Diversity of faiths and religions results in a lack of a common behavioural pattern as well as a lack of a mechanism to ensure that the moral instructions being imparted are being uniformly learnt and practised.

Even the educational institutions seem to flounder here, as not all educational institutions seem to insist on teaching moral or ethical values uniformly at all levels. They lay immense emphasis on scientific and technical education but not in the same way on imparting moral education, which is more or equally necessary. Most of the problems in society are caused by a lack of strong values, morals and integrity of character in people, hence, a civilised state must work sincerely on developing a strong value system in its population. Though the Indian constitution prescribes fundamental duties for citizens that are non-enforceable, they remain, merely, empty slogans. Given the massive onslaught of undesirable content on social media and its penetration among, and influence on, vulnerable youth, it is highly incumbent on the state, simultaneously, to regulate social media as well as draft a moral/ethical code of conduct for building a nation of people with strong morals and character.

(The writer is Associate Professor, Faculty of Law University of Delhi; views are personal)