The Supreme Court, while hearing a plea involving multiple FIRs over social media posts, noted that free speech was increasingly being misused and stressed the need for self-restraint and regulation.

What are the Supreme Court’s Observations?

• Free Speech Must Be Exercised with Responsibility: The Court emphasized that freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute. Citizens must observe self-restraint and act within the framework of reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).
  • If they fail to do so, state intervention may become necessary, which is undesirable in a democracy.
• Curbing Divisive Content Essential for National Unity: The court highlighted that divisive content on social media undermines constitutional duties, particularly the duty to uphold unity and integrity (Article 51A(c)). 
  • Such tendencies harm the values of fraternity and secularism.
• Courts Overburdened by Speech-Related Litigation: The bench expressed concern over the growing number of FIRs and legal disputes arising from online speech. 
  • This overload diverts police and judicial resources from more serious matters, clogging the legal system unnecessarily.
• Citizens Must Self-Regulate: Rather than relying on state censorship, the Court urged citizens to develop a sense of self-regulation. This would reduce the misuse of freedom and prevent legal overreach.
• Horizontal Violation of Rights: Building on the horizontal application of rights, the Court noted that citizens can infringe upon each other’s rights—particularly through online abuse and hate speech. 
  • Free speech protections are not only vertical (against the state) but also applicable among citizens.

Understanding the Right to Freedom of Speech in India

• Free speech refers to the right to express one’s opinions and ideas without fear of government censorship or punishment. 

Constitutional Framework

• Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression to all citizens. This is rooted in the Preamble’s promise of liberty of thought and expression.
  • This right spans not just spoken or written words but also includes creative expression, journalism, digital content, films, and social media posts.
• Article 19(2) permits the State to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of : 
  • Sovereignty and integrity of India, Security of the State, Friendly relations with foreign states, Public order, Decency or morality, Contempt of court, Defamation, Incitement to an offence

Social Media and Democracy: A Double-Edged Sword

The Positive Impact

• Public Engagement & Discourse: Social media shifts discussions from one-way messaging to two-way interaction. It allows citizens to voice opinions and hold leaders accountable.
• Election Campaigning & Mobilization: Political parties use platforms to reach voters, raise funds, and broadcast messages directly.
  • Example: Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign pioneered digital outreach via Facebook and Twitter.
• Governance & Grievance Redressal: Many government officials now address public complaints on social platforms.
  • Example: The late Sushma Swaraj used Twitter effectively to assist Indians stranded abroad.
• Activism & Awareness: Social platforms empower social movements and underrepresented voices.
  • Example: The #MeToo movement and #JusticeFor campaigns drew attention to systemic injustice.
• Civic Education: YouTube channels, podcasts, and forums promote political awareness.
  • Example: Independent creators like Dhruv Rathee simplify complex political issues for the public.

The Negative Impact

• Misinformation and Fake News: Unverified content spreads rapidly, sometimes with dangerous consequences.
  • Example: Mob lynchings linked to fake WhatsApp forwards.
• Online Abuse and Harassment: Social media anonymity enables targeted abuse, especially of women, journalists, and minorities.
  • Example: Coordinated trolling campaigns often silence dissenting voices.
• Echo Chambers and Polarization: Algorithm-driven content creates ideological bubbles where users only see views they agree with, deepening division while reducing  exposure to diverse ideas
  • Example: Political content often reinforces an “us vs them” mindset.
• Threats to Institutional Trust: Platforms can be used to discredit democratic institutions or spread conspiracy theories.
  • Example: During elections, fake narratives often target the judiciary, election commission, or media.
• Privacy Violations: Leaked or non-consensual content can cause lasting psychological and reputational harm.
  • Example: Revenge porn or doxxing incidents often go viral without victims’ consent.

Legal and Policy Framework for Regulating Digital Speech in India

1. Information Technology Act, 2000 – Section 69A: Empowers the government to block online content on grounds such as:
   • Sovereignty and integrity of India
   • Defence and security of the State
   • Friendly relations with foreign States
   • Public order
   • Prevention of incitement to a cognizable offence
2. The Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 : Outlines  the process for issuing blocking orders under Section 69A.
3. IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021: These Rules mandate:
   • Due diligence by intermediaries (including social media platforms)
   • Grievance redressal mechanisms
   • Code of Ethics for digital news media and OTT platforms
4. Information Technology (Amendment) Rules, 2023
   • Require Social Media Intermediaries (SMIs), Significant SMIs (SSMIs) (e.g., Twitter, Facebook), and Online Gaming Intermediaries to inform users not to host or share content flagged as fake or misleading by a fact-check unit of the Central Government, especially regarding government business.
   • However Bombay High Court struck down the amended provisions allowing the Centre to set up such a fact-check unit, citing concerns over freedom of speech and lack of procedural safeguards.

Way Forward

• Improve Content Moderation: Platforms must actively review and remove harmful, illegal, or offensive content. This can be done by people, automated tools, or both.
  • Example: During riots in Sri Lanka, Facebook had no local moderators, which made the situation worse.
• Increase Transparency: Social media companies should clearly explain how their algorithms work, how they moderate content, and how they handle user data.
  • Example: Instagram now allows users to control the kind of content they want to see.
• Promote Accountability: Platforms should apply their safety rules fairly and regularly. Independent audits and user-friendly complaint systems should be in place to handle issues like abuse or unfair removal of content.
• Strengthen Media Literacy: People should be taught how to identify fake news, check facts, and engage respectfully with different opinions. This helps create informed and responsible users.
• Invest in Safer Technology: Platforms should adopt tools like automated fact-checking, content filtering, and easy-to-use reporting systems to improve safety and reduce the spread of false or harmful material.

International standards on Freedom of Expression

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) – Article 19
  • Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
  • This includes the right to seek, receive, and impart information through any media and across borders.
• African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – Article 9
  • Right to receive information and express opinions within the law.
  • Resolution 169 (2010): Urges African states to repeal criminal defamation laws that hinder press freedom.
• American Convention on Human Rights – Article 13
  • Strong protection for free expression.
  • Prior censorship is prohibited (with limited exceptions).
  • Any advocacy of hatred or incitement to violence is punishable.

Conclusion

As India navigates a digital era where speech can build or break social trust, citizen-led regulation, civic awareness, and judicial clarity are crucial. The shift from viewing rights as entitlements to embracing them as shared responsibilities marks a mature evolution of India’s constitutional democracy.

DOWNLOAD PDF