Note: UPSC put question on this
area in last two mains 2013 & 2014
1.
Discuss Section
66A of IT Act, with reference to its alleged violation of Article 19 of the
Constitution. (UPSC Mains – GS 3 - CSE 2013)
2.
What do
understand by the concept “freedom of speech and expression”? Does it cover
hate speech also? Why do the films in India stand on a slightly different plane
from other forms of expression? Discuss. (UPSC Mains – GS 2 - CSE 2014)
Freedom of Press with responsibility
16 Jan 2015 (All India
Radio – News Analysis)
Participants: N K Singh,
Media Analyst and K V Prasath, Associate Editor, Tribune
Transcription:
Constitution of India Art.19 (1) (a) – Every citizen
- Freedom of speech & Expression – Press derive power from it – with
reasonable restriction – Over period of Last decade advent of TV and new media
i.e. Social media – spreading news in fast clip – veracity of the news is
concern.
How do you see this in the
context of self-regulation of Media?
Broadcasting Association
striving hard to give semblance of purposefulness in entire delivery mechanism;
8 restrictions in Article 19(2) and
in follow up 38 laws, restrict media;
Why do we have freedom
of expression in a democracy? Freedom of expression will become sterile
exercise unless it hurts somebody? Society grows with the broader larger power-
with volume of information – element of
tolerance – society should be more tolerant to the criticism – our society
should come to that level; It should be fought on the Ideological basis rather
than guns;
Freedom of Press Now
expanded in to Freedom of Media – 3 different streams - Print, Social Media (17
Cr internet enabled mobiles) – Elementary question – India had free press in
free expression ever since framing of constitution whereas US had it only by
amendment- aberration in 1975-77 but even that had been corrected – Tolerance level – Idea you may agree or
you may reject – E.g. In case of interference in parliamentary debates - right
to expression cannot be taken away;
Self-regulation in
certain sector not given tangible result – supervisory – watchdog body - press
council of India – Grievance Redressal. New
media is Neutral – everybody has equal access –where the conflict begins?
Regulatory body must be
appointed by the govt. – in jury up to specific purpose – should not interfere
in the free flow of Idea; Indian Society is different from the other countries
which are based on Individualism; Here Peer pressure works well in India – Self-regulation
is beneficial; concern is - checks & balance in the free flow of
expression- Parliament has the power of
privilege, Judiciary has the power of contempt, Bureaucracy has power of
disrespect of state, Individual has power of defamation;
Two type of aberration – against Individual and
criticism of institution should be on Ideological basis;
As discussed Media vis-à-vis Parliament and Media
vis-à-vis Judiciary, of course Media vis-à-vis Executive;
Media demand – codifying Parliamentary privileges -
Parliamentary privilege committee – rejected the Idea last time;
Parliamentarian and Media members’ fraternity can be more cordial;
Judgment can be criticized but cannot attribute to the
Demarcating the line between Free Press and
Responsibility? Aggressor vs. aggrieved?
Our Democracy is adversarial – in this role of media
is negative – pin point the wrong done by state craft – unfortunately who will
determine which is right or wrong;
Restriction vs. Quality
of News? Is it people oriented – health
public information – bringing more political class – Intolerance should be
weeded out which arise from the identity group – problem encountered currently;
___________________________________________________________________________+
Right to Expression & Information
Technology Act
12 Jan 2015 (All India
Radio – Current Affairs)
Participants: George
Mathew, Institute of Social Science and Pavan Durgal, Information Technology
Law Expert & SC Advocate, and Surabi
Agarwal, Business Standard
Transcription:
Section 66 of IT Act – regulate speech on Internet -
SC demand detailed guidelines; Do we need these guidelines?
Mathew: IPC
and IT Act provides enough safeguard against defamation; Section 66 is
unnecessary;
In the perspective of Cyber-law & Cyber issues –
SC stated Right to speak is not Right to offend – what are your views?
Durgal: Sec.66A
added by amendment in 2003 – seeks to cover huge ambit of area; it is beyond
imagination; (in normal criminal jurisprudence - Intention & Action) – if
malware, spyware programme – offence committed with the person’s computer
deemed to be committed by the person himself;
What are the biggest challenges in Sec.66 of IT Act?
Durgal:
It conflict with the FR of Indian Constitution - Article 19 of the constitution
– freedom of
speech & expression, subjected to the reasonable restrictions
– sovereignty, security, friendly relationship with the foreign nation, public
order, decency, morality – under this free speech can be restricted;
Law (Sec.66A of IT Act)
– while criminalizing an act, it failed to define grossly offensive message or
malicious in character - leaving it with the complainant; Kind of regulation is
much required to prevent the ambiguity & misuse of the Act; it is similar
to that of misuse of Dowry cases; Jurisprudential
issues need to be settled;
How it affect the Social fabric – with 300 million
people across internet?
Mathew:
outstanding feature of India is Freedom of Expression; Self-restrain is much
needed; Last two decade we are entering the tremendous Technological Internet
evolution – in transition period – creating norms & convention in this
period is essential; India can become model for the world through this process;
What are the kind of rules & regulation being
adopted by the front runner of the Technological Internet evolutionary Nation?
Durgal: Different Nations have adopted different strategy;
US with the first amendment to their constitution, given the Right to Free
Expression; other countries mandate the service providers to do due diligence;
it differs on the basis of different socio-logical standard and history of
society distinct customized approach to legislation;
Internet evolution –
made individual a Global broadcaster, Global Transmitter, and Global adopter; Social
media works beyond the borders, across the globe;
How communication over the internet and in-person
changed? Trends in Communication?
Postcard took one week
to carry information to another person – Technology have changed the life –
Sociologically even if 99% it has positivity,
1% is enough to create malice, negative impact and problem;
Riots in Delhi & Musafurnagar use social media
to create hostility between the communities? How you see Sec.66A in this
context?
Mathew:
Instead of Sec.66A, we have enough legitimate protection in our legal system;
Indian Society evolving over centuries – Technology,
Science, Reaching the poorest of the poor – tremendous possibility to bring
them up – it should not be curtailed;
How you see the Sec.66A in the Perspective National security
as the Social media is misused?
Durgal:
Sec. 66A is not evil phenomenon – Bangalore – spreading message/philosophy of
the banned terrorist outfit; Refer IPC
499 & 500 – law of defamation – doesn’t include electronic format;
Mathew:
Law cannot stop the one or two individual aberration – Society is the thrust area, to keep the future generation more
civilized – ensure best use of the innovation & technology; 3 years old
child is given the access to the mobile without restriction or parent’s
vigilance;
Durgal:
Cyber violence or online harassment cyber-bullying
cases or nuisance, spam can only be handled
with such legal provision; Law meant for the public benefit should not be misused;
Two girls in Mumbai, Cartoonist in Kolkata… What is
the right approach, should we take it as one in the million &choose to ignore?
Or do we need to change the structure of Sec.66A?
Durgal:
Keep the essential provisions of the section and drop the ambiguous parts which
have potential to misuse; Defining – “grossly
offensive message or malicious in character”; illustration should be given for clarity;
Mathew:
with good justice system and better enforcement – should sent message across
the country/society; Law cannot be the solution for all the mishaps;
Durgal:
Law can only provide guideline, prescribe deterrent consequence for the
violation – Law is one component and the
major component is Capacity Building; Cyber Law & Cyber Education
should be imparted in the School Education;
“Internet don’t have Delete Button”
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Rajya Sabha TV - The Big Picture –
Freedom of Expression Vs Expression of Hate
(For continuity, Copy pasted from
Vivekanandan sir’s Content)
Summary:
Indian constitution
through Article 19(1) guarantees the right of freedom of speechand
expression. It also imposes some
restrictions.
No freedom comes in absolute terms.
Freedom of expression should be carried on with some
responsibilities by media.
Voice of majority
should be the determining factor in democracies.
The law and order
problem is caused by the individuals who do not know how to respond in a
democratic and peaceful manner to the things they do not like in society.
All of us live in a
society where there are rules. These rules prescribe ways of protesting.
Anybody who violates these rules pose a threat to law and order.
This is an issue of
civilization and democracy. Sometimes they are in consonance with each other.
When they are in dissonance society faces many problems. They usually go hand
in hand.
Democracy has helped
unequals to voice their expression of hate against unequal system.
Looking at the growing
number of protests, experts say that India is becoming intolerant society.
Three stakeholders have
equal responsibilities in exercising these democratic rights. They are
The one who makes provocative
statement.
People who oppose it.
Liberal elements, like media, involved
in interpretation.
In our society the law
or the cultural milieu of the society provides ample scope for individuals and
collectives to ventilate their grievances to show their opposition.
Hate is also expressed using freedom of expression.
Democratic rights of
civilization and civilization norms have been expanding.
The kind of society we
are creating, where zones of engagement are becoming drawn in a different
manner, may not be civilizational. It is a threat to democracy.
The role of media and liberals is very much
important in these issues because it is the liberals who come with different interpretations which create conflicting
situations.
Hate speeches should be discouraged. They are
usually made for some political gains.
____________________________________________________________________________
