Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, said recently that he was losing sleep over the attempts by governments to tighten their control of or spy on the Internet. The computer scientist was speaking about moves in the United Kingdom and the United States to widen surveillance of public communications, but his comment echoes the growing concern among civil rights and free speech advocates in India about several provisions of the Information Technology Act and Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011. At the heart of the issue in this country is the conflict between the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression, and arbitrary, often political, actions that have begun seriously to erode it. Attacks on individuals and inconvenient opinion are being mounted — most recently in the Mamata Banerjee cartoons case — using Section 66 A of the amended IT Act, 2000. This provision makes it a crime to send, using a computer resource or a communication device, information known to be “false” with the aim of causing “annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill-will”. Emails are also similarly covered, and the penalty for the offence is a jail term of up to three years. Used in conjunction with provisions of the Indian Penal Code, or separately, such vague definitions are offensive weapons in the censor's toolkit. Crucially, they far exceed the reasonable restrictions on free speech identified in Article 19 (2) of the Constitution.
In the way they are framed, some provisions of the IT Act and the 2009 amendments, such as Section 69 A (power to issue directions for blocking of access of any information through any computer resource) and 69 B (power to authorise monitoring and collection of traffic data or information) pose serious questions on India's commitment to open democracy. But newer rules covering intermediaries hosting content online are even more controversial and arbitrary. Several Members of Parliament have voiced their concern on these rules, under which anyone can demand the scrubbing of information online on flimsy grounds, and entities hosting the content must act in 36 hours. There is little surprise that a Rajya Sabha MP, P. Rajeeve, has moved a motion calling for the annulment of the intermediaries rules. His move has inspired a signature campaign and gained wide popular support. The best course open to the Centre is to revisit the IT Act and rules, and hold a national consultation of the kind organised by Jairam Ramesh on genetically modified crops. Cyber terrorism cannot be used as a bogey to subvert constitutional guarantees on free speech.
Keywords: IT Act, free speech, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, Tim Berners-Lee, internet freedom, cyber crime
Although i respect the concept of freedom of speech but it should be not in a uncontrolled manner. There should be certain provisions to ensure that this right of 'freedom of speech' is not being misused. I have seem how the photographs of our leaders and renowned personalities is being altered or made funny in social networks like facebook. This is not good for a country as they are the leaders of our country. They represent our country in several aspects and several times. So we must have respect for them.
Internet is a medium of communication and much like any other medium, for example Print or electronic media, cannot be allowed to function without reasonable restrictions. All the nations uniformly prohibit any material related to certain aspects like child pornography. Even the constitution of India places reasonable restrictions on different kinds of freedom in the interest of society and national security. The problem arises when the state begins to manipulate and use such well intentioned rules to suit its own interests. Internet is an ever growing entity with online content and its users growing exponentially by the day. In this context it is a gross mistake to deal with activities on internet just like any other activity. Its magnitude is so huge and implications so vast that very soon we will need an autonomous body like Election Commission to deal with different aspects of online information.
In the light of the several provisions of the Information Technology
Act and Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011
prepared by the Central Government of India, it becomes crucial for
the online service providers and content writer to look at the
provisions and seek timely and rational modifications to protect the
citizen's constitutional rights and broader human rights. The
constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression should not be
superseded by any form of legislation which is arbitrary, politically
motivated,based on the whims and fancies of a person.
If you recall the incidence of the online policing for taking action
against the chief Minister of West Bengal, you will surely feel the
misuse of the Information Technology Act and Information Technology
(Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011. The policy planners should
rectify such loophole in the act and modified act should be
implemented after extensive consultation with the exerts of the field.
"Cyber terrorism cannot be used as a bogey to subvert constitutional guarantees on free speach."This final sentence of your editorial signals a firm admonition to those,who are bent upon fragmenting freedom of expression. Truth that reveals more than conceals the dark patches of an individual's personality may fail to placate the palate of the concerned.This is exactly the reason,when uncomfortable truths about someone are exposed,the affected turns intolerant to the source of revelation, whether individual or media.We have seen how Assange has been emotionally assaulted, vandalised, imputed and socially hounded by none other than the US,the super power of the world. Free speech is oxygen to open democracy.Many politicians including those who sit in the gallary of power cannot encourage free speech,for it may hurt them deeply by exposure of their misdeeds.We cannot afford to put the nation in a retrograde mode by perniciously framing the IT Act and protect the intersts of a few persons
While no body can disagree with misuse of IT Act to curb genuine web
based critics, it will be disastrous to allow the free run of the
web under the guise of freedom of speech or expression. We can take
leaf out of American experience in this regard. Nicholas D C
Kristof in "Not Quite a Teen, Yet Sold for Sex" in NYT few days back
was revealing a shocker of fact that child prostitution and sex
trafficking prevalent extensively across USA, in fact as bad as in
Nepal or Thailand, mainly facilitated through internet freedom
ensured under First Amendment of US constitution. No responsible
Government can abrogate its responsibility by not controlling cyber
space under the pretext of internet freedom or freedom of
expression.
I agree. In addition, the police must get a court order before they take any action against any invidual in cases such as posting the Mamata Banerjee cartoon. Otherwise, all political leaders can arrested for making false statements or offensive for any individual. The freedom of speech and expression applies to all.
Please Email the Editor