Section 66A is history

The law is an ass, wrote Charles Dickens. Thank god, we have judiciary to tame it

shishir

Shishir Tripathi | March 24, 2015


#freedom of speech   #section 66 A   #section 66 A IT act  

Our prime minister was inspired by Benjamin Franklin as a young man. While sharing his thoughts on the Republic Day, along with American president Barack Obama in his fortnightly radio address, Mann ki Baat, prime minister Narendra Modi said what inspired him about the life of the American statesman was “how a person can intelligently try to change his life”.

Well, it is indeed an inspiring quality. But Franklin is more famous for his unflinching faith in freedom of speech. In one of his writings, Franklin said, “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”

One cannot be certain that the prime minister was aware of Franklin’s views on freedom of speech, but surely, if he would have not waited for the judiciary to finally rescue our ‘freedom of speech and expression’ on March 24, he would be known as the true admirer of the great American statesman. Modi, however, failed to act first on section 66A of the Information Technology Act.

The greatness of our democracy, however, lies in our judiciary often succeeding in restoring the dwindling faith of citizens in the state.

Striking down the draconian provision in the IT law that allowed police to arrest people for posting “offensive content” on the internet, the apex court judgment differentiated between ‘discussion, advocacy and incitement’. “Mere discussion or even advocacy of a particular cause, howsoever unpopular, is at heart of article 19) (1) (a) (all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression), said the judgment. It went on to add, “Only when such discussion or advocacy reaches the level of incitement that article 19 (2) [it allows the state to make laws imposing reasonable restriction of freedom of speech and expression] kicks in.”

Discussing the difference between the three – discussion, advocacy and incitement – the apex court said at this stage, law for curtailing freedom of speech to ensure law and order could be made.

The first PIL in the case was filed by law student Shreya Singhal after two girls, Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan of Palghar in Thane district near Mumbai, were arrested in 2012. There crime? They had expressed resentment against the shutdown of Mumbai following the death of Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray. While one wrote the Facebook post, the other had ‘liked’ it.

Whether what they did could be called ‘incitement’ needs little discussion. Two youngsters expressing their feelings against something what they thought to be unfair could be hardly termed as “incitement” by anyone, barring those hell-bent on crushing any differences of opinion. 

The Supreme Court said that the said section also failed two major tests – “the clear and present danger” test and the “tendency to create public disorder” test. The court observed, “In order to support a finding of clear and present danger it must be shown either that immediate serious violence was to be expected or was advocated, or that the past conduct furnished reason to believe that such advocacy was then contemplated.”

The provisions have been clearly misused by the authorities in the Thane girl’s case. There was nothing in the statement that could have indicated the probability of “immediate serious violence” nor did they have a ‘mischievous’ past that could have propelled the police to take action against them.

As the apex court pronounced the judgment, one was reminded of Mr Bumble from Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist. “The law is an ass,” he said.

Comments

 

Other News

Kodnani’s acquittal raises doubts about criminal justice system

 Maya Kodnani, a BJP leader who was the MLA from Naroda when this locality on the outskirts of Ahmedabad witnessed one of the most gruesome episodes during the Gujarat riots of 2002, was acquitted by the Gujarat High Court on Friday. Her acquittal in the Naroda Patiya massacre case is only a sequel to

BMC took nearly 48 days in resolving one complaint

The number of civic complaints with BMC has increased from 61,910 in 2015 to 92,329 in 2017, which is 49% in two years. A report titled ‘Civic Issues Registered by Citizens and Deliberations done by Municipal Councillors in Mumbai’ released by Praja Foundation has found some interesting facts a

Who is Atishi Marlena?

Atishi Marlena is among the nine AAP functionaries who were dismissed by the union home ministry asserting that their posts were created without the approval of the centre. Marlena, served as education advisor of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led government in Delhi. While she was intrumental in improving the

Leadership? Learn it from Jaising, Ambani, Doshi

The Fortune magazine has named three Indians – lawyer Indira Jaising, industrialist Mukesh Ambani and architect Balkrishna V Doshi – among the world’s greatest fifty leaders.

Energy as the new value system for redesigning daily life

Remember Kardashev scale? For the uninitiated, it’s a method of measuring a civilization’s level of technological advancement, based on the amount of energy it is able to use for communication. We will get to its unconventional relevance to the big urban questions at the end, but just keep it a

48 MLAs, MPs have declared cases of crime against women

Out of 1580 MPs and MLAs with criminal cases, 48 (three MPs and 45 MLAs) have declared cases related to crime against women. The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and

Current Issue

Current Issue

Video

CM Nitish’s convoy attacked in Buxar

Opinion

Facebook    Twitter    Google Plus    Linkedin    Subscribe Newsletter

Twitter