- Get link
- Other Apps
- Get link
- Other Apps
The Supreme Court struck down Section 66-A of the
Information Technology Act, 2000, on Tuesday.
Pronouncing their verdict on a PIL filed against the section
in a packed courtroom, which empowers the police to arrest a person for
allegedly posting ‘offensive materials' on social networking sites, a Bench of
Justices J Chelameswar and RF Nariman said the section violated the fundamental
right to freedom of speech and expression and was therefore was illegal.
Terming liberty of thought and expression as
"cardinal", the Bench said: “The public's right to know is directly
affected by Section 66-A of the Information Technology Act."
"Section 66-A of the IT Act is struck down in its
entirety," said the apex court bench of Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice
Rohinton Fali Nariman.
"Our Constitution provides for liberty of thought,
expression and belief. In a democracy, these values have to be provided within
constitutional scheme," said Justice Nariman, pronouncing the verdict.
"There is no nexus between public order and discussion
or causing annoyance by dissemination of information. Curbs under Section 66A
of the IT Act infringes on the public right to know."
Calling the written word of the provision, which comprises
terms such as ‘"annoying", "inconvenient" and "grossly
offensive", vague, the apex court said: “What may be offensive to a
person, may not be offensive to others".
The assurance given by one government was not binding on its
successor, the Bench said. "Governments come and go but Section 66-A will
remain forever," the bench said.
The SC, however, refused to strike down two other provisions
of the IT Act that provide blocking of websites.
The verdict comes following cases of persons being arrested
for their posts on social networking sites. Most recently, a Class 12 student
was arrested over a Facebook post on UP leader Azam Khan.
The first PIL seeking the scrapping of the law was filed in
2012 by a law student after two girls were arrested in Palghar in Maharashtra
over a Facebook post immediately following then Shiv Sena supremo Bal
Thackerey’s death.
BJP to take “structured view”
Hours after the Supreme Court scrapped Section 66-A of the
Information Technology Act, 2000, the Government on Tuesday claimed it differed
with previous UPA regime's stand on the provision.
In a letter addressed to the apex court, the government said
that it respects freedom of speech and expression and was never in favour of
curtailing communication of honest dissent or criticism on social media.
The government, however, also said it was willing to enact
additional, more stringent guidelines so as to prevent abuse of Section 66A of
the Act which allows arrest of a person for posting allegedly
"offensive" content on websites.
"Our government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi
took a very conscious decision that we don't support the stand of the previous
government. We respect the freedom of speech and expression. We respect
communication of ideas on social media and we are not in favour of curtailing
communication of honest dissent, opinion, disapproval or criticism on social
media," Union IT Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said.
In his initial comments on the Supreme Court verdict, he
said the government had stressed that it would not support any interpretation
of Section 66-A of IT Act that curtailed the ideas of freedom of speech and
expression enshrined under Article 19(1) of the Constitution.
"It is very important to be noted that in our affidavit
filed, apart from reiterating our new position on behalf of Government of
India, we have clearly conveyed that if Section 66A of the IT Act cannot be
interpreted in consonance with Article 19(1) read with Article 19(2), then we
don't support that interpretation at all," he said.
Prasad had also said he would make a more structured
response once he reads the entire judgment that runs into 200 pages, he said.
"I am awaiting
the judgment. The Government of India's stand is quite different from the
previous government's and it has been very clear and consistent which I have
just mentioned. I will come with a structured response after going through the
judgemnt," he said.
Victims welcome verdict
Renu Srinivasan, who was arrested from Thane for liking a
comment following the demise of Shiv Sena supreme Bal Thackeray, said after the
verdict, people will no longer be afraid to speak their minds.
Her friend Shaheen Dhada, who had called to question the
bandh that followed Thackeray’s death in Mumbai, said: “I am very happy today,
I feel that justice has been granted to me after two years. The post for which
we were arrested was not abusive or wrong:
it was misunderstood. My family was always supportive of me and they
never scolded me for this. Now no one has to be afraid of saying right things,”
she said.
Jadavpur University professor Ambikesh Mahapatra, who was
nabbed for circulating emails mocking West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee but
against whom charges were dropped later, called the landmark judgment a victory
of common man.
“(It is a) Victory for common man: democratic and human
rights of people has been protected,” he said.
The youngster arrested last week for posting comments on UP
leader Azam Khan also hailed the order. “I am very happy and grateful to SC,”
he said.
Provision poorly drafted: Chidambaram
Congress leader P Chidambaram also welcomed the Supreme
Court judgment holding Section 66A of the IT Act as unconstitutional, saying it
was poorly drafted and misused.
"I welcome the judgment of the Supreme Court holding
that Section 66A of the IT Act is unconstitutional. The section was poorly
drafted and was vulnerable. It was capable of being misused and, in fact, it
was misused," he said.
The former Union Minister, who held the Home and Finance
portfolios in UPA government, said there could be a case of misuse of freedom
of speech and in such cases ordinary laws should apply and the offender should
be dealt with under them.
"If some provisions of the law have to be strengthened,
that could be considered. But Section 66A was not the answer," Chidambaram
said.
The verdict, however, drew flak from certain quarters.
Referring to the 2012 incident, Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut said: “Social
media does have positive impact, but it's also being misused. Police must have
some powers in their hands.” (With
agency inputs)
Source: www.tribuneindia.com
Comments
Post a Comment