Internet Shutdown

SYLLABUS:

GS 2> Governance   >  Aspects of Good Governance  >   Fundamental rights

IN NEWS:

• India witnessed the highest number of Internet shutdowns in the world in 2023, according to a report released by Access Now, a not-for-profit group that focuses on digital rights.

MORE ON NEWS:

• This is the sixth straight year India has topped the list. Shutdowns in Manipur and Punjab last year led to millions being cut off from the Internet
• India logged 116 instances of internet shutdowns in 2023, accounting for 41% of the 283 globally, according to data by Access Now.
• With 37 orders, Myanmar, where the military seized power in a coup in 2021, recorded the second-highest number of Internet shutdowns, followed by Iran (34), Palestine (16), and Ukraine (8).
• Of the 1,458 shutdowns Access Now has recorded since 2016, India has accounted for 773 (53%) of them.
• Also, the report indicated that in 2023, a total of 13 states and union territories in India imposed internet shutdowns. Notably, seven of these regions disrupted internet services five or more times.

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF INTERNET SHUTDOWNS

• National Security: 
  • Internet shutdowns are viewed as a measure for maintaining national security, as they help curb communication among groups that might incite violence or coordinate harmful activities. 
  • For instance, in 2022, 41 out of 75 internet shutdowns in India were ordered citing terrorism as the reason (Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) report).
• Control of Misinformation and Rumours:
  • Shutdowns can help prevent the spread of misinformation and rumours that can lead to panic and violence.
  • For instance, during the Citizenship Amendment Act protests in 2019, internet shutdowns were imposed to control the spread of rumours that could incite violence.
• Public Order:
  • Managing public order by restricting access to social media during sensitive times helps authorities control public sentiment and prevent mass mobilization that could lead to unrest.
  • For example, Rajasthan shut down the internet during Gujjar community protests for reservation. Similarly, during the Maratha Quota reservation protests in Pune, internet services were blocked to prevent the organization of large, potentially violent gatherings
• Against Ethnic or Communal Tensions:
  • In regions with high ethnic or communal tensions, internet blackouts are used to prevent the spread of rumors or hate speech that could lead to riots or clashes. This approach was evident during several shutdowns in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. A recent example includes the internet shutdown in Manipur last year. 
• Avoid disruptive role:
  • In certain extreme situations where rumours through WhatsApp and other social media start playing a disruptive role, it may become necessary to have internet shutdowns. For instance, incidents like the exodus of North East Indians from Bangalore in 2012 can be avoided with the help of shutdowns.

LAWS RELATED WITH SUSPENSION OF INTERNET SERVICES:

• Telegraph Act, 1885 and the allied rule:
  • The 1885 Act empowers the central government to regulate various types of telecom services including internet services and grant licenses for them.
  • In 2017, the central government notified the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Service) Rules under the Telegraph Act to govern suspension of Internet.
• These rules derive their powers from Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, which talks about interception of messages in the “interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India”.
• The Rules provide for temporary shutdown of telecom services in a region on grounds of public emergency (up to 15 days at once).
• The rule give senior bureaucrats from the Home Ministry at the central and state levels the power to order shutdowns.

• Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973:
  • Before 2017, Internet suspension orders were issued under section 144 of the CrPC, which gives District Magistrates broad powers during dangerous situations.
  • Despite the 2017 rules, the government has often used the broad powers under Section 144.
• Information Technology Act, 2000
  • The IT Act has provided limited power to the government to issue individual web content blocking orders, instead of a larger suspension of interest itself.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST INTERNET SHUTDOWNS”

• Violation of Fundamental Rights:
  • Internet shutdowns infringe upon the right to freedom of speech and expression, as reiterated by the Supreme Court of India in the landmark Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India case. The court emphasized that indefinite shutdowns are unconstitutional.
• Right to Information: 
  • Internet blackouts restrict access to information, impacting the public's ability to stay informed about critical issues, including government actions and public health updates.
• Economic Impact:  
  • Internet shutdowns result in significant economic losses. For instance,  as per the recently released report by Access Now, internet shutdowns reportedly cost the country [India] USD1.9 billion and a loss of USD118 million in foreign investment in the first half of 2023 alone.
  •  Also, Gig economy and white-collar employment sectors such as IT, financial and consulting services rely on internet and shutdowns will freeze their economic activity.
• Increasing frequency of shutdowns:
  • India shuts down Internet services more than any other democracy in the world. For instance, as per the Access Now report, in 2023, the number of internet shutdowns rose by 41%, from 201 in 2022 to 283 in 2023. 
• Frivolous grounds:
  • Internet shutdowns are being implemented for routine policing, and administrative purposes such as preventing cheating in exams and preventing local crime.
  • For instance, the Rajasthan government imposed a shutdown to stop cheating in the Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers (REET) exam
• Vague provisions:
  • Under the 2017 Rules, telecom/internet shutdowns may be ordered on grounds of public emergency and public safety. But Public emergency and public safety have not been defined in the 1885 Act or the 2017 Rules. Also, Internet shutdowns are not always officially announced.
• Based on subjective assessment:
  • The Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology in its report ‘Suspension of Telecom Services/Internet and its Impact’ noted that no parameters have been laid down to decide the merit of internet shutdowns and shutdowns have been ordered based on subjective assessment.
• Affect free press:
  • Journalists may find it impossible to do ground-reporting from already volatile areas.
  • For example, in a petition in the Supreme Court, Anuradha Bhasin, a Kashmiri journalist, stated that she said had put a halt to the work of printing newspapers due to the prolonged internet lockdown.
• Impact on Education and Healthcare: 
  • Internet shutdowns hinder access to online education and telemedicine services, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. For example, the prolonged shutdown in Kashmir in 2019-20 severely impacted students and patients who relied on digital platforms.
• Disruption of Essential Services: 
  • Access to government services and subsidies, such as MNREGA payments and other welfare schemes, is impeded during shutdowns, affecting millions of beneficiaries who rely on online systems.
• Gender-based Violence and Accountability: 
  • Internet shutdowns make it difficult to document atrocities, including gender-based violence. For instance, the shutdown in Manipur made it harder to document and hold perpetrators accountable for crimes such as murder, rape, arson, and other gender-based violence, as highlighted in a report on the impacts of the Manipur shutdown.
• Non-compliance with Legal Standards: 
  • Many shutdowns do not meet the ‘three-part test’ under international law, which requires actions to be lawful, pursue a legitimate aim, and follow standards of necessity and proportionality. India's failure to meet these criteria in cases like Jammu and Kashmir and Manipur has drawn criticism from human rights groups.
• International Human Rights: 
  • As a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, India is expected to uphold basic human rights standards. Repeated internet shutdowns have been criticized for violating these international commitments.
• Global Reputation: 
  • Frequent internet shutdowns can affect a country's global image as a free and open society. For a country like India, which is a growing technology hub, repeated shutdowns can deter international businesses and negatively impact foreign investments.

WAY FORWARD

• Make access to internet a fundamental right:
  • States and countries have already declared internet access a fundamental right. In 2016, the United Nations declared internet access a human right.
• Implement standing committee on Communications and Information Technology recommendations:
• Review the Rules to address all aspects of internet shutdown and bring them in tune with changing technology to ensure minimum disturbance to the public.
• Issue uniform guidelines for states/UTs, required to be followed while ordering an internet shutdown.
• Codify defined parameters that constitute as public emergency and public safety and put in place a mechanism to decide the merit of an internet shutdown.
• DoT to formulate a policy to selectively restrict the use of certain services instead of banning the internet as a whole
• Conduct a study on the impacts of internet shutdowns and its effectiveness in dealing with public safety and public emergency.
• Data dissemination:
  • Government should document the reasons, time, alternatives considered, decision-making authorities and the rules under which the shutdowns were imposed and release the documents for public scrutiny.
• Identify best practices around the world:
  • Governments should identify best practices in addressing issues at their source, prioritizing alternative measures to Internet shutdowns.

PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. ‘While the arguments in favour of internet shutdowns focus on immediate benefits to security and public order, the arguments against emphasize the broader implications on economic stability, human rights, and societal progress. Discuss. (15 marks, 250 words)