IT Act in need of malware protection
- Will reach out to 'muslim' brothers, address Ram Temple issue: Modi
- Congress backs Priyanka Gandhi as she hits out at opposition for 'targeting Robert Vadra without proof'
- CJI bars advocate's entry in SC for 6 months for sexual harrassment
- Elections 2014 LIVE: Modi hurls a 'khooni panja' at Cong, says its responsible for 1100 lives in Telangana
- IPL 7 Live Cricket Score, KXIP vs SRH: SRH struggle in stiff chase against KXIP
Curtailing free speech can boomerang in double quick time in the digital age
The alacrity with which the enforcers of law are able to put ordinary netizens behind bars for slighting the egos of politicians with their harmless comments has raised the ire of the Supreme Court, also reveals the government's utter incompetence in dealing with a powerful and open medium like the internet.
A vaguely worded sentence in the Information Technology Act under Section 66A, which criminalises any comments made online or electronically causing annoyance or inconvenience, has come under very heavy criticism, forcing the government to tweak this regulation by stating that only a high ranking police officer or government official will be allowed enforce this law. Section 66A was just another innocuous clause under the IT Act but its draconian impact was seen following the immediate arrest by the Maharashtra police citing this law of two young women for posting certain online comments on Mumbai shutting down after the death of the Shiv Sena supremo Balasaheb Thackeray.
The powers that be should realise that internet as a medium is here to stay for a very long time and would benefit a larger section of the society from the time one embraces it wholeheartedly rather than trying to curb its influence. Given the demographics of the country, with majority of the population below the age of 27, internet has become the most preferred medium for this class of people in expressing their thoughts and communication. This anger among younger population is also amply reflected in the public interest litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court against Section 66 of the IT Act by 21-year-old Shreya Singhal.
Responding to the notices issued by the Supreme Court, Attorney General Goolam E Vahanvati admitted that the arrests were wrong but said Section 66 (A) of the IT Act need not be scrapped.
- Five months after gruesome ATM attack, accused still at large
- Ex-syndicate member of Bangalore University held in marks-for-cash scam
- Accused get bail as police fail to file chargesheet
- ‘Naxals collected info on trucks carrying explosives from Khadki to Ahmednagar’
- A tale of two villages: Ramayan and Mahabharat
- UP CM tears into Modi bastion on first visit to Gujarat, says Third Front ready