In India, the governments are known to use sedition and other laws pretty liberally to silence free speech.
I'd rather that this "serious flaw" remain, than the US too become the same as any other nation, where posting a joke on the PM can lead to jailtime.
But intentionally inciteful hate speech against racial/religious minorities can (and occasionally does) lead to fines or jailtime.
> On 15 April Merkel announced in a press conference that the German government had approved Böhmermann's criminal prosecution, but would abolish the respective paragraph 103 of the German penal code before 2018. Intense criticism followed the Chancellor's decision, with speculation that she decided to allow the prosecution in order to protect Germany's refugee deal with Turkey.[3] The case was dropped in October 2016.[4]
We already know the answer: they will claim that attacks on them are racially motivated (regardless of the truth) and shut them down. Plenty of examples of that sort of thing going on today outside of politics.
Though if the target is a politician, I'd expect them to prefer to err on the side of allowing it.
https://www.humanityinaction.org/knowledgebase/206-you-can-s...
https://www.dw.com/en/is-it-illegal-to-call-someone-a-nazi/a...
We see outrage here when a site like 8chan is rightfully lambasted for sparking various terroristic attacks. But not when a woman is arrested for laughing at a politician. Or when a black man is killed for acting or saying the wrong thing to a police officer. Or the local government deciding not to step in and display an episode of a TV series showing a gay couple which is textbook viewpoint discrimination.
These freedoms only go in one direction and I only wish those who were ardent fighters of freedom of speech would be consistent in what and who they fight for.