INTRODUCTION
The Republic of India today has been labelled as the Internet shutdown capital of the world, a label that all citizens of the Republic regret to attain. Internet in the present age has become an essential tool for the citizens, especially when it comes to the right of free speech and expression under Article 19(a) of the Indian Constitution and the Right to trade, profession and occupation under Article 19(g). Internet its uses and importance today both in our personal life’s and for the economy is much known, and thus the question arises what is the impact of the Internet shutdown. Today Internet runs at loggerhead with Liberty and Security, and challenge before us whether we want security or liberty, something which the citizens of the republic must reflect upon.
Liberty and Security
Liberty and Security have always been at loggerheads, and have always become a point of contention both for the State and the citizens. Liberty is the pillar on which the State stands, but then liberty exists without security. Liberty and security must always be like a stationary pendulum, for the pendulum of choice must never be in extreme to compromise the other side. Internet today is a reflection of liberty, especially in light of Article 19(a) and 19(g) and therefore depriving the citizens of the Internet is a violation of liberty by the state, but with this said, it does not mean that security is inferior to liberty. The idea is not to suggest that it’s better to be free than to be sure, the idea is to ensure that the citizens of the Republic have all rights and liberty at a given point in time, while ensuring security for all at the same point. Internet shutdown and its contentions have been taken up the highest court of the country, The Supreme Court of India in the Anuradha Bhasin Vs. Union of India and Ors., the court looked specifically on the matter of Liberty Vs. Security. Liberty can be curtailed by the State but that curtailment must always be tested for its reasonableness and proportionality, least be stated that it must be under the law of the land.
Internet Shutdown and Citizens
There have been a total of 552 cases of Internet shutdown in India, from 2012 till the end of 2021 with the longest shutdown being coincidental of the same number 552 days in the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir. This being a preventive shutdown, the beginning saw a restriction on landline and mobile services as well. Preventive shutdowns, which are imposed in anticipation of an event, have been increasing exponentially in the country since 2016. In the year 2021, there were just 3 cases of the reactive shutdown, which are imposed to curtail an existing law and order situation but 42 cases of preventive shutdowns. Section 5 of The Indian Telegraph Act 1885 gives power to the executive to curb internet on the ground of public emergency or to safeguard public security. The executive has however imposed a shutdown both preventive and reactive for reasons other than this, taking shelter under the same section of the act. In the year 2020, 69% of the Internet curbs were due to political instability while 4% were due to communal violence and 7% were due to protest. The Internet has been curbed citing elections, religious holidays and exams among others.
Internet Shutdown due to examination is a fairly common scenario in Rajasthan, with sometimes it being the patwari recruitment examination or the more common Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teacher (REET). The Internet has been curbed even for the Rajasthan Administrative Services (RAS) Examination; the rationale behind these shutdowns is to conduct the public examination in a fair manner without any instance of unfair means and practices. The procedures to be followed as in case of Internet Shutdown are clearly stated under the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety rule) Rules 2017 notified under Section 7 of The Telegraph Act 1885. The rules are clear that any officer but the Home Secretary in the case of Government of India must not suspend the telecom services or the Secretary level officer in the respective State Government’s Home Department. It is only in unavoidable circumstances that an officer not below the rank of a joint secretary issues such order, and even in such a situation it must be duly authorised by the Union Home Secretary /Respective State Home Secretary.
In case of Rajasthan, however, we see orders related to the Internet shutdown being brought in by divisional commissioner and not the Home Secretary (Rajasthan). From 23 to 24 October 2021, when exam-related Internet shutdown was last imposed in Rajasthan (it was imposed in three districts, Jaipur, Dausa and Bikaner) the government was expecting around 15 lakhs candidates. For the candidates appearing liberty had to be restricted for security, but then for the remaining millions of citizens who had nothing to do with the examination, most might not be aware of the examination why was their liberty curtailed. If the argument, which the government has, is Public Interest, then by the same rationale the Internet in the entire country must be shut down when the Union Public Service Commission conducts its examination.
Test of Proportionality: CONCLUSION
The idea is not to point fingers at the institutions but only to ask the question as to duty-bound citizens of the Republic that to what extent Public Interest can be used, to sometimes curtail liberty over security. Maybe what the citizens want is a Test of Proportionality to ensure a rationale between the objective and the measures adopted to achieve it. For the pendulum of choice to not go in extreme between Liberty and Security, it is imperative that interventions must be proportionate to the need for such interventions and not only by sanctioned law but also carried out in accordance with the law. It is essential to understand that the measures adopted to achieve the objective must not infringe to an extent than necessary for the fulfilment of the aim. The citizen’s reply to the Internet shutdown and the debate over liberty and security is that whenever their rights are infringed and thus liberty compromised, it must be based on an existence of a rational and legal connection between what has to be achieved and how it has to be achieved.
Authors Name:
1. Vjay Paul (Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities & Social Science, Graphic Era University, Dehradun).
2. Jyoti Kamboj )Research Associate, Centre for Advanced Studies in Social Science,
Dehradun).
