Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance
Context
- The Union Government informed the Supreme Court that it had written to state chief secretaries to follow the law laid down by the apex court in the Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India Case on the issue of internet shutdowns.
Back
- India has collectively had more than 500 instances of Internet shutdowns.
- A total of 13 States and Union Territories imposed shutdowns in 2023, where seven of them disrupted Internet services five or more times.
- Shutdowns spanning over five days or more shot up from 15% of all shutdowns in 2022 to more than 41% in 2023.
Legal Provisions Relating to Internet Shutdown
- Grounds: Indian States and Union Territories can impose an internet shutdown only in case of a “public emergency” or in the interest of “public safety”, according to the Indian Telegraph Act.
- However, the law does not define what qualifies as an emergency or safety issue.
- Till the year 2017, shutdowns were imposed largely under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
- Section 144 of CrPC gave the police and the District Magistrate the powers in order to prevent unlawful gathering of people and also to direct any person to abstain from a certain activity.
- However, in 2017 the law was amended and the Government promulgated the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rule 2017.
- They include ensuring transparency, reviewing the shutdown after 48 hours, and giving citizens an opportunity to challenge the shutdown.
| Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India Case: – In 2020 the Supreme Court by ruling on Jammu and Kashmir Internet shutdown held that indefinite internet shutdowns by the State is not permissible under Indian Constitution. – The apex Court further stated that imposition of Section 144 can not be used as a mechanism to avoid genuine protest which is permitted under the Constitution. 1. Section 144 has very specific parameters, only if those parameters are satisfied then only a Magistrate can pass the orders. Key Highlights of the orders: – Usage of the Internet is the Fundamental Right under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. – Internet shutdowns can be of temporary period but not for indefinite period. – Government to publish all orders imposing restrictions under Section 144. – The Court had also said that any order with regard to Internet Shutdowns will come under Judicial Scrutiny. |
Arguments in Favour of Internet Shutdown by the Government
- National Security: The government suspends internet services as a temporary and targeted measure to prevent the spread of misinformation, coordinate unlawful activities, or address security threats.
- Temporary and Targeted Measures: The internet shutdowns are intended to be temporary and narrowly focused.
- These measures are not meant to infringe on long-term access but rather to address specific and immediate concerns.
- Preventing Unrest and Violence: Suspending online communication helps prevent the organization of protests, riots, or other forms of civil unrest.
- Counteracting Fake News and Disinformation: During times of crisis or conflict, false information circulating online can exacerbate tensions and contribute to misinformation.
Arguments Against the Internet Shutdown by the Government
- Impact on Freedom of Expression: Internet shutdowns infringe upon the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
- Global Image and Investment: Frequent internet shutdowns impact India’s global image, raising concerns among investors and international partners.
- Human Rights Concerns: Internet shutdowns raise human rights concerns, including the right to access information, freedom of speech, and the right to peaceful assembly.
- Economic Disruptions: India has a rapidly growing digital economy, and internet shutdowns lead to significant economic losses.
- Educational Challenges: With the increasing use of online platforms for education, internet shutdowns severely affect students’ access to learning resources, online classes, and communication with teachers.
- Lack of Transparency: The government needs to provide clear justifications for such actions and communicate transparently about the duration and reasons for the shutdown.
Conclusion
- In a democracy, government is expected to provide a rationale for disrupting the internet services in a periodic manner.
- Indiscriminate shutdowns have high social and economic costs and are often ineffective.
- For better internet governance the Indian civil society needs to push for a transparent and accountable system.
Source: TH
Further Reading: Right to Freedom (Article 19 to 22): Meaning, Provisions & Significance
Previous article
The Code of Conduct Judges Need to Follow
Next article
NHRC Celebrates Human Rights Day