The recent Muzaffarnagar communal riots have brought to the forefront yet another challenge. Media has reported the involvement of social media in these communal riots which originated, among other things, due to the dissemination and forwarding of a video clip which showed the killing of two men of a particular community.

Though the clip was taken off YouTube, it went viral when it was exchanged through YouTube, Twitter and WhatsApp.

Investigations revealed that the said video apparently pertained to another country and had been online since 2010, but was given a misleading headline which caused communal tension.

Effective law

Is Indian cyberlaw effective to deal with causing communal hatred through information disseminated and transmitted on social media?

The Information Technology Act, 2000, covers all kinds of electronic information and the use of computers, systems, networks, resources and communication devices. This legislation was amended in 2008 whereby the scope and ambit of the legislation was widened and a variety of new crimes were incorporated. While the amendment increased the coverage of cyber crimes, it compromised on the quantum of punishment by making a majority of cyber crimes bailable offences, with minor punishment of three years and fine.

A perusal of the amended Actshows that it does not deal with electronic hate speech/content directly. The nearest provision that can be invoked is Section 66A which makes it an offence if someone sends any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character, by using a computer resource or communication device. Further, the act of sending information through a computer system or a communication device, which a person knows to be false but is sent for the purposes of causing annoyance, inconvenience, hatred, enmity, persistently has also been brought within the ambit of the Act.

Statutory duty

A statutory duty of due diligence has been straddled upon all intermediaries in India. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011, mandates intermediaries and social media service providers to have specific terms and conditions which prohibit the users to host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update or share any information that is (a) grossly harmful, harassing, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, paedophilic, libellous, hateful, or racially, ethnically objectionable, disparaging, or otherwise unlawful in any manner and (b) threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, (c) friendly relations with foreign states, or public order or (d) incites any cognizable offence or prevents investigation of any offence.

While the Government has absolute power to block such electronic content, blocking is technically not feasible due to the ubiquitous nature of internet, computer/mobile applications and mobile messengers. It is clear that the existing cyberlaw is not adequate for facing such challenges.

Indian lawmakers have to appreciate that social media can be used for purposes of inciting communal hatred and violence. Thus, there is a need to come up with specific provisions in the law to deal with dissemination, publication, distribution, forwarding and transmission of any electronic content or electronic records dealing with communal hatred, or communal violence , that may impact public order and peace in India. The Muzaffarnagar incident is yet another wake-up call for the Indian nation.

Unlawful use of social media needs to be made specifically punishable with seven years imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10 lakh.

(The author is a Supreme Court advocate and President, Cyberlaws.net)

Related Topics