SC Strikes Down ‘Draconian’ Section 66A
New Post has been published on http://www.newsnish.com/technology/web-social/sc-strikes-down-draconian-section-66a/
SC Strikes Down ‘Draconian’ Section 66A
India’s Supreme Court has struck down a controversial law which allowed police to arrest people for comments on social networks and other internet sites.
The court ruled that the controversial Section 66A of the Information Technology Act was unconstitutional.
Section 66A of the Information Technology Act is unconstitutional in its entirety, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday striking down a “draconian” provision that had led to the arrests of many people for posting content deemed to be “allegedly objectionable” on the Internet.
“It is clear that Section 66A arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free speech and upsets the balance between such right and the reasonable restrictions that may be imposed on such right,” said a Bench of Justices J. Chelameswar and Rohinton F. Nariman. The definition of offences under the provision was “open-ended and undefined”, it said.
In recent years, several people have been arrested for their comments on Facebook or Twitter, sparking outrage.
The government had defended the law, saying it was meant to deter people from uploading offensive material.
In recent years, several people have been arrested for their comments on Facebook or Twitter, sparking outrage.
The government had defended the law, saying it was meant to deter people from uploading offensive material.
The court then went on to say that Section 66A actually had no proximate connection with public order or with incitement to commit an offence. “The information disseminated over the Internet need not be information which ‘incites’ anybody at all. Written words may be sent that may be purely in the realm of ‘discussion’ or ‘advocacy’ of a ‘particular point of view’. Further, the mere causing of annoyance, inconvenience, danger, etc., or being grossly offensive or having a menacing character are not offences under the [Indian] Penal Code at all,” the court held.
Holding several terms used in the law to define the contours of offences as “open-ended, undefined and vague”, the court said: “Every expression used is nebulous in meaning. What may be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another.”
