Protecting Freedom of Expression in the Online Space

A Facebook status message can put you behind the bars. When you heard such news from countries in the Middle East, China and many other authoritarian states, you thought that it would never happen in India, the country we all blissfully consider the largest democracy in the world. But what happened in those countries could happen to those in India as well, as discovered by two young girls in Palghar in Mumbai, as they were arrested for dissenting against the shutdown in the city after the death of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackerey.

Arresting someone for voicing sentiments not liked by people with power is nothing but an act of fascism which has no place in a democracy. Everyone knows that not all shops and establishments remained closed on the day of cremation of Bal Thackerey not because of the respect for the leader but out of sheer fear. And the girls were only expressing their frustration on this sordid state of affairs, without naming anyone. In fact, as Justice Markandey Katju rightly pointed out, the girls were only echoing the sentiments shared by the Supreme Court on the illegality of bandhs in the country. Though the Maharashtra government suspended the police officers who arrested the girls, damage had already been done. The incident had created a sense of insecurity among the netizens in India and there was a sort of lull in the social media space in the country for some time. People thought a second time before scribbling their opinion in the virtual space. A healthy democracy can ill afford such as situation, where the citizens are afraid to speak out and express their opinions fearlessly. 

Silencing dissent has suddenly become the fad in India among many political parties. It was only recently that a man was arrested for tweeting that Karti Chidambaram, the son of Union Finance Minister P Chidambarama, was corrupt. In the month of April Kolkata police arrested Professor Ambikesh Mahapatra for posting a cartoon critical of the Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee. In September this year anti corruption crusader and free speech campaigner Aseem Trivedi was arrested on charges of sedition. After the arrest of the girls in Palghar for their innocuous comment in Facebook, another man was dragged to the police station by MNS workers in Palghar, alleging that he had posted a status message that was “disrespectful’ of Raj Thackerey. 

The internet and the social media are powerful tools of political freedom, where the common man can express his opinion freely and it is better for a democracy to encourage people to express their ideas openly and fearlessly. In a democracy anyone has the right and freedom to articulate what he/she believes is right and express those ideas in way that is not inimical to the life and freedom of another person. If that freedom infringes upon the rights and freedom of another person, then existing laws can interfere. 

It has become imperative for the Indian government to review the Section 66 (A) of the IT Act 2000, the basis on which the Palghar girls were arrested. Many experts believe that the section is not in line with the Constitution of India and internationally accepted standards of freedom of speech and expression. The nebulous wordings of the section could be misinterpreted and abused by the various law enforcement agencies in the country. There is an urgent need to lay down clear and comprehensive explanations to the restriction on free speech in the IT act.

If freedom of speech and expression, which is the corner stone of democracy, is taken away from the people, we as a country will fail and the democracy that we are so proud of will meet its end sooner rather than later. 

An Accident(al) Writer

After a few minor personal tragedies, including an accident that saw him confined to the metaphorical ‘four walls’ of his house for a month, this writer is back in blogging mode after exactly 2 months since he posted his previous article. In the past he had eloquently explained to many why he was an ‘accidental writer’, who started writing when he was once in a depressing period of joblessness. Now after two accidents within a time span of 3 years and 3 months, it would only be fair to call him an ‘accident writer’ too, whose right hand that bore the brunt of both accidents has become a subject of self pity to him and a matter of wit and humour to others.

When it comes to accidents, how often could be termed ‘frequent’ is a question that this writer has been confronting all these while, for many have asked him why he is frequently meeting with accidents. On his part, this writer strongly believes that a time span of 39 months between two accidents could by no means be called ‘frequent’ and any man worth his salt would be very much capable of matching or surpassing his feat any time in the future. 

At the same time, this writer has great respect and admiration for his professional organisation, for it hasn’t fired him for his predilection of falling unceremoniously on his right shoulder, skidding off from his two-wheeler, that too twice in a time span of 39 months that saw him away from work for one whole month each time.

Unlike after the previous accident, where this writer had many things to write about The Peculiar Living - Life of a Temporarily Handicapped Man, this time around he has no claims to make, no situations to explain and no pretty physiotherapist to rant about (with due respect to the professional talent and kindness of the lady who helped him with the physiotherapy). He has only a prayer that he may not be subjected to such painful confinements in the future, neither 'frequently' nor rarely, which would put him away from work and away from blogging.