Posted by Juliette Terzieff
Indian Internet users have begun to discover the limits imposed by a new law on web content, encountering interruptions in their surfing in the form of screens displaying a message that content has been blocked under instruction from the Ministry of Telecom.
Human rights activists, bloggers and Internet users are lashing out at the new on the grounds that its provisions constitute infringements on the rights to privacy, free speech and expression. Indian authorities have characterized the new law as a balance between individual freedoms and collective security, but critics say the restrictive provisions rival Chinese attempts to censor web access.
The new law prohibits web sites and service providers from disseminating any material that might be harmful, blasphemous or insulting – and requires them to remove any such content within 36 hours of a complaint registration. Internet café will have to increase current security measures – which include installing surveillance cameras and obtaining identification from all customers – to keep a detailed record of each individual’s surfing activities. Owners are required to turn over the records to government authorities at the end of each month.
India has suffered two large-scale terrorist attacks in recent years and is contending with armed conflict in Kashmir. In November 2008 terrorists unleashed a four-day long attack on hospitals, cafes, community centers and educational institutions in Mumbai that left 164 people dead and over 300 injured. Earlier this year 18 people died and 81 were wounded when assailants detonated bombs in three Mumbai neighborhoods. In both cases, investigators have reported traces of Internet activity as central to building their cases.
While rights advocates express sympathy for the government’s efforts to address security concerns associated with the Internet, critics charge the vague wording of the law potentially leaves it open to wide interpretation by authorities.
“With this kind of blanket surveillance regime, we are on a very slippery slope,” Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Center for Internet and Society told the Washington Post. “The language is so vague that it is open to arbitrary interpretation. . . . In comparison with other democracies in North America and Europe, the Indian rules appear to be on the China end of the spectrum.”
India is home to the world’s third largest number of Internet users behind China and the United States, even though less than 10 percent of the population has regular access. But growth over the last decade has been spectacular – rising from 5 million to 100 million between the year 200 and now.
In many countries the increase of Internet penetration has led to social and political upheaval as dissenters are able to reach a global audience to expose abuses and push for reform. In countries with repressive regimes and state-controlled media, individuals have been able to sidestep official controls to reach like-minded countrymen and help launch protest movements.
It’s a reality that has triggered censorship battles between governments and civil society, the private sector and rights advocates around the world over the last decade. In many countries, such as Egypt and Vietnam, bloggers have been specifically targeted for harassment or arrest for their online activities. In other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Syria and China, authorities have moved to censor Internet access more broadly.
The advance of Internet access around the world has also provided militant groups and terrorist organizations with more advanced tools to both accelerate internal communications and reach a broader audience. As a result of these and other criminal activities, such as pedophilia, governments in even the most democratic and open countries have moved to place some restrictions on the Internet.
“While there are legitimate security concerns to deal with, repressive governments that cite such issues for broad restrictions often have domestic political concerns in mind,” says Islamabad-based defense analyst Mohammad Bokhari. “Ultimately it comes down to those dedicated individuals and groups that are being targeted for dissenting activities being willing to keep taking the risk that are the best hope for pushing change.”
While unrestricted and universal Internet access has the broad support of the United Nations, human rights groups and most Western governments, there is no real mechanism at the international level to compel a government to ease restrictions on the Internet. With little chance an enforceable mechanism will come into force anytime soon, the combined pressure of stakeholders from across the spectrum to wield the power of the Internet as a building block for the future.
