Internet Shutdown

 Nowadays, Internet Shutdown has become a common Phenonmen. India is widely considered to be a world leader in cutting of access to the Net, yet there are no detailed official Data on internet shutdown in India.

         Moreover, India has topped in the list of internet shutdown globally, According to report of software freedom law center's trackers there have been 381 shutdown since 2012, 106 of which were in 2019. According to another report on internet shutdown (internet shutdown trackers) India has the highest number of network disruptions order by the state.

   Impact of internet shutdown

# Education

# women safety

# Human rights

# Financial

          According to council for research on internet economic relations, the Indian economy suffered a loss of 3 billion due to internet shutdown.

 Consiquesntly this leds to a new kinds of inequality like digital inquality where social and economic backwardness is expected due to lack of information and internet shutdown. 

   In the case of Faheema Shirin v state of Kerala, kerala High court declared that right to internet access as a fundamental Right forming a part of the right to privacy and the right to education under Article 21 of Indian constitution.

Recently, The SC Held in the Writ petition Anuradha Bhasin 2019.

" It was the best times, it was the wrost of time,

It was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness,

It was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity,

It was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness,

It was the spring of hope, it was the winter of winter of despair,

We had everything before us, we had nothing before us."

SC passed following orders..

# The respondent authorities are directed to pulish all orders in force and any future order under section 144, CrPC and suspension of telecom services, including internet, to enable the affected persons to challange it before the High court or appropriate forum.

# we declared that the freedom of speech and expression and the freedom to practice any profession or carry on any trade, business or occupation over the medium of internet enjoys constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 19(1)(g).

# The restriction upon such fundamental right should be in consonance with the mandate under Article 19 (2) and (6) of the Constitution, inclusive of test of proportionality.

# An order suspending internet services indefinitely is impermissible under the Temporary Suspension of Telicom Service ( Public Emergency or Public Service) Rules, 2017, Suspension can be utilized fir temporary duration only.

# Any order suspending internet issued under the Suspension Rule, must adhere to the principal of proportionality and must not extend beyond necessary duration.

# Any order suspending internet under the Suspension Rule is subject to judicial review based on the parameters set out herein.

# The existing Suspension Rules neither provide for a periodic review nor a time limitation fir an order issued under the Suspension Rules. Till this gap is filed, we direct that the review Committee constituted under Rule 2(5) of the Suspension Rules must conduct a periodic review within seven working days of the previous review, in terms of the requirements under Rules 2(6).

# We direct the respondent state / competent authorities to review all orders suspending internet services forthwith.

# orders not in accordance with the law laid down above, must be revoked. Further, in future, if there is a necessity to pass fresh orders, the law laid down herein must be followed.

# In any case, the state/ concerned authorities are directed to consider forthwith allowing government websites, localized/ limited e _ banking facilities, hospitals services and other essential services, in those regions, wherein the internet services are not likely to be restored immediately.

   In this case SC further held that  following grounds, restrictions should be followed with the refferd case laws...

* There should be clear and Present Danger ( Schenck v US, Justice O.w. Holmes)

* There are no disparity between advocacy and incitement because Advocacy is protected but incitement is not protected.

* "Reasonable ristriction" can not that the limitation imposed on a person in enjoyment of an excessive nature, beyond what is required in the interests of the pulice.

  Principals of Proportionality

     In this context in the case of Mohammed Faruk v state of MP The  court must in the considering the validity of the impungned law imposing a prohibition on the carrying on of a business or profession , attempt an evaluation of its direct and immediate impact upon the Fundamental rights of the citizens affected thereby and the larger public interest sought to ensure in the light of the object sought to be achieved, the necessity to restrict the citizes freedom - the possibility of achieving the object by imposing a less drastic restraint- or that a less drastic restriction my ensure the object intended to be achieved.

Internet shutdown Vs Section 144 Crpc 

1.  The power under section 144 of CrPC, being remedial as well as preventive, is exercisable not only where there exists present Danger, but also when there is an apprehension of danger. However, the danger contemplated shounld be in the Nature of an emergency and for the purpose of preventing obstruction and annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed.

2. The power under section 144 of crpc can not be used to suppress legitimate expression of opinion or grievances or excercise of any democratic rights.

3. An order passed under section 144 of CrPC should state the material facts to enable judicial review of the same. The power should be excercised in a bonafide and reasonable manner, and the same should be passed by relying on the material facts, indicative of application of mind. This will enable judicial security of the aforesaid order.

4. While exercising the power under section 144 of CrPC the magistrate is duty bound to balance the rights and restrictions based on the principales of proportionality and there after, apply the least intrusive measure.

5. Repetive order under section 144 CrPC would be an abuse of power.

6. The respondent/ competent authorities are directed to review forthwith the need for continuances of any existing order passed under section 144 of CrPC in accordance laid down above.

There are Some Longest shutdowns- 

1. 178 Days and Counting

4th August 2019 Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir - An internet shutdown was imposed on 4th August 2019, when Article 370 of the Constitution was abrogated by the Parliament of India.

2. 145 Days

4th August 2019 - 27th December 2019

Kargil- Kargil District of Laddakh faced a shutdown of 145 days which was imposed since 4th August, 2019 on the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir.

3. 133 Days

8th July 2016 - 19th November 2016 Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir due to the agitation caused by the killing of Burhan Wani on 8th July 2016.

4. 100 Days

18th June 2017 - 25th September 2017 Darjeeling, West Bengal due to the ongoing agitation for a separate Gorkhaland.

You can also Join our Telegram Channel @legalstudyzone

Our Facebook page