In a landmark judgment protecting digital civil liberties, a Supreme Court Constitution Bench cracked down on the frequent use of blanket internet shutdowns by State governments to curb cheating in exams or manage local unrest. The Court ruled that such sweeping suspensions must pass the stringent ‘Proportionality Test’ to be legally valid.
Key Points
- Fundamental Right Protected: Reaffirmed that the right to access the internet is deeply embedded within the freedom of speech and expression [Article 19(1)(a)] and the freedom to practice any profession [Article 19(1)(g)].
- Localized Restrictions Only: Ruled that blanket state-wide or district-wide shutdowns are unconstitutional; restrictions must be geographically localized (e.g., confined to specific towers) and temporary.
- Transparency Mandated: Ordered all state governments to publicly upload any internet suspension orders within 24 hours, outlining the precise legal and security justifications.
- Economic Impact Assessed: Acknowledged the devastating impact of prolonged shutdowns on India’s digital economy, heavily affecting gig workers, online education, and digital banking services.
- Review Committees: Strengthened the oversight mechanism, mandating that the statutory Review Committees must objectively assess if the threat level genuinely warranted an internet blackout over alternative policing methods.
Source Link: LiveLaw: Supreme Court Judgment on Internet Shutdowns
Q6. In the landmark Anuradha Bhasin case (and subsequent jurisprudence), the Supreme Court of India held that the right to access the internet is a fundamental right protected under:
A) Article 14 and Article 15
B) Article 19(1)(a) and Article 19(1)(g)
C) Article 25 and Article 26
D) Article 32 only
