I am mystified by our government’s approach to the Internet. It defies logic and lacks consistency with the values of our republic and democracy.
Our vibrant democracy with a constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech and liberty is a beacon of hope for oppressed people all over the world, who see our country and its democracy with all its limitations and problems as an aspirational model for their nations.
The Internet, apart from being an alternative media, is also the platform for innovation and vibrant entrepreneurship with thousands of new small businesses being built on it. But governments everywhere have the same instinctive fear of it, because it represents free and unfettered views, and unlike conventional media which is vulnerable to advertising and other forms of coercion, the Internet is completely ‘unmanageable’ for the establishment.
The IT Rules being proposed, represent a serious risk to our democracy and could be seen as legal intimidation of citizens and entrepreneurs by the government, established political and business interests and religious and cultural bigots. These rules are riddled with weaknesses and ambiguities.
In a country where there is a due process of law and has a legislation like the IT Act that explicitly provides for actions against defamation, obscenity etc, the courts or tribunals should be deciding who is right and wrong, not a bureaucrat or politician.
Also, in October last year, the government of India moved a ridiculous proposal to change the existing system by having 50 governments under the UN umbrella oversee Internet governance around the world. This is a dangerous view, propelled by those who have no idea how the Internet works.
At a time when the world is looking to India as the leading light of free speech, its position on this matter is closely associated with countries like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Brazil, South Africa and Rwanda, none of which are sparkling examples of democracy, free speech, or human rights.
The government must immediately withdraw this proposal as we can’t be seen as a country insecure of free speech amongst the people of the world and certainly among our own people.
— The writer is Member of Parliament