Should Internet Shutdowns be Used to Maintain Public Order?

Context:

Since 2012, the number of shutdowns in India recorded by The Internet Shutdowns Tracker maintained by the Software Freedom Law Center stands at 738.

• Between 2016 and 2022, 60% of Internet shutdowns across the world took place in India. 

Internet Shutdown:

• It is an intentional disruption of internet or electronic communications, rendering them inaccessible or effectively unusable, for a specific population or within a location, to exert control over the flow of information.

Reasons of Internet Shutdowns in India:

• Situations of Social Unrest: A lot of shutdowns are made to prevent communal tensions, civil war, or riots and situations of unrest.
  • Some of them are imposed during protests, many to prevent cheating during exams, and many due to religious processions.
• Preventive Shutdowns: These are imposed before an event takes place.
  • For example, following the circulation of a video of a tailor getting beheaded in Udaipur, there was a shutdown in anticipation of a communal riot. 
• Reactive Shutdowns: These are imposed after an event takes place and is generally the easiest way to control an escalating law and order situation.

Statutory Backing– Right to Access the Internet vs. Internet Shutdowns:

• Article 19 of the Indian Constitution: It mentions freedom of speech and freedom to practice any profession. 
• Article 21 of the Indian Constitution: It protects the right to life and liberty, which also encompasses the right to education and the right to exercise one’s freedom to access the Internet. 
• Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution: It  says that reasonable restrictions ought to be imposed on the grounds of a threat to the nation, to national sovereignty, integrity and defense, or to avoid incitement to, or commission of, a cognisable offense.
• The Information Technology Act, 2000: It maintains that threats to national sovereignty or integrity or defense call for website blocking. 
• The Supreme Court Decisions: In various cases, including in Anuradha Bhasin and Faheema Shirin, the Supreme Court has held that access to the Internet has to be preserved. 
• Exercisable Conditions: Shutdowns should be exercised only in situations which require exceptional control and surveillance. 
• Limited Scope with Proportionality: The Court has said a shutdown needs to be temporary, limited in scope, lawful and proportionate.

Rules Regarding Internet Shutdown: 

• The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885: It stipulates that only the Home Secretary of the Union or a state can pass an order, and that the order must include the reasons for the decision.
• In Unavoidable Circumstances: The order can be issued by an officer of the rank of Joint Secretary or above, authorized by the Centre or the state Home Secretary. 
• Nodal Officers: Telecom service providers must designate nodal officers to handle such requests. 
• Review Committee: The order should be forwarded to a review committee the day after it is issued, and must be reviewed by the committee within five days to assess its compliance with Section 5(2) of The Telegraph Act. 
  • Composition in the case of the Central Government: The review committee comprises the Cabinet Secretary and the Secretaries of the Departments of Legal Affairs and Telecommunications. 
  • Composition in the case of the State Government: The committee comprises the Chief Secretary, Secretary, Law and a Secretary to the state government (other than the Home Secretary).

Argument in Favor of Internet Shutdowns:

• National Security: Governments are faced with sometimes challenging situations that may threaten public order and national security. 
• Prevent hate speech, fake news etc: Official rationales for shutdowns include combating fake news, hate speech, and related violence, securing public safety and national security, precautionary measures, and preventing cheating during exams etc. 
• Ensure Peace and Public Stability: Internet shutdown acts as a preventive measure used by the law & order administration as a last resort to address mass protests, civil unrest, curbing the spread of misinformation so as to ensure peace and public safety. 
• Avoid Disruptive Role: In certain extreme situations where rumors through social media start playing a disruptive role, it may become necessary to have internet shutdowns.

Arguments Against Internet Shutdowns: 

• Violate Human Rights: Internet shutdowns attack on civil liberties and the constitutional rights of the citizens. They not only curb dissent but give the government excessive control over the dissemination of information and dominance over the narrative. 
• Economic Cost: India lost over $1.3 billion in internet shutdowns across the country making it the third-most economically affected country after Iraq and Sudan. 
• Fails to achieve the objective: There is no conclusive evidence showing that Internet shutdowns lead to maintenance or restoration of public order. 
• Social Cost: Fundamental services such as education, health care and other public services are held back. Internet banking stops working. Agricultural extension services and emergency services may be unable to function. 

Conclusion:

• The freedom of speech and expression is not an absolute right, but shutdowns cannot happen for frivolous reasons. 
• Internet shutdowns have a significant impact on education, healthcare, and the economy. 
• It is important to consider the principle of proportionality and the socioeconomic impact while enforcing law and order.

News Source: The Hindu