Supreme Court Calls On Parliament To Make Laws To Regulate Social Media

The Logical Indian

August 10th, 2015 / 12:35 PM

Image Courtesy : medianama

If you thought that scrapping of section 66A would give you absolute freedom on the internet, think again! Five months after scrapping the controversial section 66A of the IT Act, the Supreme Court on Thursday stressed the necessity for a clear and unambiguous law to curb the online circulation of malicious and defamatory messages.

The court statement came when senior advocate L Nageswara Rao said that a message about him being involved in a rape case was circulated on WhatsApp as a part of a malicious campaign. The bench agreed that people should not be given free hand to run such malicious campaigns on social media and the Parliament should enact a new law to curb such acts.

Why was Section 66A scrapped?

Section 66A of the IT Act had a very vague and obscure statement that made its reach so broad that it covered virtually any opinion on any subject. This meant that almost anyone disagreeing with your opinions that you publish on social media could misuse the provision and prosecute you. Indeed, several cases of individuals getting harassed and sued for simply expressing their views on social media were recorded while the law was in place.

Several debates and campaigns concerning section 66A raged on for years, and finally in March, 2015 the Supreme Court observed that the law contradicted the concept of freedom of speech and quashed it.

Is a new law necessary?

As the apex court observed, it is indeed necessary to curb messages on social media that deliberately promote false defamatory charges and hate speech with an aim to polarize and incite mob violence. At the same time, the new law, if enacted, should allow individuals to express their views freely online, and guarantee the protection of netizens against threats and harassments.

The internet has always been an unbiased medium that encourages free speech, and we do not want a new law that can be manipulated and misused to suppress opinions. We hope our lawmakers will come up with a law which, unlike section 66A, clearly defines the line between free speech and hate speech.


Contributors

Edited by :

Share your thoughts..

Related Stories

Hindutva Pages That Published List Of 102 Inter-Faith Couples & Called For Violence, Taken Down By Facebook

Facebook Personal Chat

Teenager Arrested For Posting Derogatory Comments About PM Modi In Facebook Personal Chat

66A

Govt Committee Plans To Bring Back Section 66A & This Is Why All Of Us Should Be Worried

Minor Rape

Marital Rape Of Girl Above 15 Years Is Not A Criminal Offence: SC After Parliament’s Decision

Journalists Don’t Enjoy Special Privilege, Rights Of Press Not More Than Rights Of Common Man: Delhi Court

Facebook Whatsapp Fake News Group

Admins Of Facebook & WhatsApp Groups Can Be Jailed For Fake News & Offensive Posts In Their Groups

Latest on The Logical Indian

Get Inspired

‘Will Help Create Awareness About Discrimination Against Transgenders,’ Says First Trans Judge From Assam

News

Ranchi Child Trafficking: Nun Admits On Camera To Selling Babies

News

Angry Mob In Karnataka Lynch Man Over Fake Rumour Of Child-Abductors

Fact Check

Fact Check: From Mandsaur Gangrape to Maharashtra’s Mob Attack: Three Instances Where Fake News Went Viral

News

Muslim Personal Law Board Will Not Interfere In Supreme Court’s Decision On Section 377

News

Bol Gai Deng: A Labourer In Sudan Is Contesting For Presidential Elections

x

Stories that deserve attention, delivered to your inbox!

Handpicked, newsworthy stories which deserve the attention of a rational generation.