Online offences: Govt proposal for Sec 66A-like steps finds no UN takers

India’s proposal India’s proposal earlier than a United Nations (UN) ad-hoc committee to undertake measures just like the controversial — and now defunct — Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, for introducing home laws in member nations to classify “offensive messages” by means of “communication devices” like social media as ‘offences’, has up to now did not garner assist of any nation.

Delegates from the European Union, the United Kingdom, Georgia and Luxembourg have opposed the nation’s proposal for being violative of the correct to speech, members attending the UN’s conference mentioned. In 2015, the Supreme Court had struck down the actual part, calling it “unconstitutional”.

Buy Now | Our greatest subscription plan now has a particular worth

A delegation from India is presently on the second session of the UN-organised worldwide conference on countering using data and communications applied sciences for prison functions in Vienna. The Indian delegation consists of officers from the External Affairs, Home and IT Ministries. Set up by the phrases of a UN General Assembly (UNGA) decision authorised in May 2021, the ad-hoc committee is meant to submit a draft conference on countering cybercrime to the General Assembly’s 78th session in 2023-24. If handed, it’ll then be legally binding on all member nations of the committee.

Best of Express PremiumPremiumPremiumPremiumPremium

One of the Indian delegation’s proposals to the committee is basically a word-by-word copy of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act (IT Act) – the Indian delegation has basically prompt that every one member nations of the committee introduce offences of their respective home laws for sending “offensive messages” by means of a pc useful resource or social media platforms.

In a landmark judgment in 2015, the Supreme Court had struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, calling it unconstitutional for “being violative of Article 19(1)(a) and not saved under Article 19(2)” of the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) offers folks the correct to speech and expression whereas Article 19(2) accords the state the facility to impose “reasonable restrictions” on the train of this proper. The provision was criticised for being misused by legislation enforcement businesses over the vagueness of what was thought-about to be “offensive”. However, regardless of the ruling, numerous cases have surfaced since the place numerous state police departments have booked folks below the now defunct provision.

ExplainedAd-hoc panel

Set up by the phrases of a UN General Assembly (UNGA) decision authorised in May 2021, the ad-hoc committee is meant to submit a draft conference on countering cybercrime to the General Assembly’s 78th session in 2023-24. If handed, it’ll then be legally binding on all member nations of the committee.

According to delegates on the committee’s ongoing conference, India’s proposal has been met with opposition by main members. The EU opposed India’s suggestion, saying that it’s an “infringement on the freedom of expression and would therefore not constitute a universally recognised relevant offence for others”. On comparable traces, the UK delegation mentioned that there was not “sufficient justification” for contemplating the proposal that “risks infringing rights of expression”. Delegates from Georgia and Luxembourg too took an analogous stance. El Salvador mentioned that its home guidelines solely apply to offensive messages which may pose a threat to youngsters, whereas Nigeria mentioned it solely has civil cures for such an offence and never prison ones.

So far, no nation has supported India’s proposal on creating offences in home laws for sending “offensive messages” by means of a communication service – particularly, the delegation from Russia mentioned that it wanted extra time to consider India’s proposal, and China didn’t interact with the proposal in any respect, in accordance with delegates on the conference.

Queries despatched to MEA, MHA and MeitY had been unanswered till the time of going to press.

According to a senior authorities official, the Indian delegation has floated the proposal “to gauge the global consensus on the idea of penalising objectionable content on social media”. “We wanted to tell the UN convention that we used to have a law which penalised such content. The issue Section 66A ran into was of misuse. Our aim is that after deliberation among the various member nations, we can possibly reach a consensus on how the provision could be made better,” the official mentioned on situation of anonymity.