Hits and misses of NEP 2020 and its impact on legal education - The Daily Guardian
Connect with us

Policy & Politics

Hits and misses of NEP 2020 and its impact on legal education

The prominence of this new policy is that it redefines the education system on several trajectories, enabling easy access and participation of students, multidisciplinary courses, system efficiency & governance, and facilities of research and development.

Shresth Vardhan

Published

on

Emerging from a painful partition and struggle for independence, the first-ever education policy of the nascent Indian democracy was implemented in the year 1968, under the reign of the then Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi laying focus on Right to Education. Ever since then, India has seen a new education policy only once every few decades. Debated sparingly, it was then replaced by the policy of 1986, administered by Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. Embodying a few modifications, the policy of 1992 has since then, guided the education system of the country. It is now approximately 3 decades later, that a refurbished National Education Policy (NEP-2020) with sweeping amends has been unveiled by the government spearheaded by Mr. Narendra Modi. Not since 1992, has there been more educational reform. As a result, the NEP 2020, has been doing rounds of debate and suggests to touch down on several prime issues of educational development. The prominence of this new policy is that it redefines the education system on several trajectories enabling easy access and participation of students, multidisciplinary courses, system efficiency & governance, and facilities of research and development.

 A Blow to Rote

 The NEP-2020 welcomes some revisions as it establishes a single regulatory body for higher education institutions, discontinues MPhil programs, and provides for multiple entries and exit points in degree courses. It likewise suggests low stakes board exams and a common entrance exam for universities across the nation. This was necessitated due to the dearth of quality institutions and unreasonable entrance requirements such as high cut-off marks.

 Another applauding step that the policy tenders is to universalize school education at all levels by expanding access to more early childhood education. It further envisions to ace a 100 percent Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) from Pre-Primary to Secondary level (age group of 3 to 18 years) in school education by 2030 thereby proffering a strong foundational literacy and numeracy for all.

In a significant shift from the 1986 policy, the existing school curriculum structure of 10+2 will be revamped with a 5+3+3+4 structure thereby encapsulating children of all ages (3- 18 years) under the covers of formal schooling.

 Beyond this, the policy aims to expand open schooling facilities through the establishment of an autonomous body to march open and distance learning (ODL) as well as massive open online courses (MOOCs). This step caters to the dropouts and working children who are unable to find the space to attend formal schooling. It also suggests the medium of education to optionally be in the regional language mother tongue or local language until at least grade 5 as it manifests better creativity and understanding abilities.

Assessment modules will see a comprehensive shift from a program outcome-based evaluation to a year-round assessment structure with regular and formative assessments that will promote learning and development and at the same time will test higherorder skills, analytical and critical thinking.

Additionally, the students will now be able to flexibly pick and choose their interests within-subjects ranging from arts and sciences to vocational and academic streams as well as extracurricular and curricular activities.

Another idea that the policy professes is the concept of bagless days or internship for students, so as to open them up to the realworld understanding of the subjects of their interest from local experts and inculcate skills at an early age.

Donning another feather in the policy is the inclusion of coding as a subject with the intent to merge with the rapidly increasing technological era. This will expand innovation and seamless creativity while promoting analytical and logical thinking. The policy likewise speaks of a comprehensive set of recommendations for the promotion of online and digital education consequent to the recent epidemic to better prepare the system with alternative modes of quality education in case such need arises.

The idea is to make education and learning easier accessible and engaging. The realization of this idea will involve board exams to be testing primarily core capacities and competencies rather than rote learning. There will also be a provision for an improvement exam after the main exam if the student so wishes. Standardized school exams will be introduced for students in grades 3,5& 8 for the purpose of tracking the progress throughout the years of study in the school rather than at the end. The National higher education regulatory council NHERC will be set up to function as the primary and sole regulator in the higher education sector including teacher education but excluding medical and legal education.

Orchestrating Legal Education

Under the helm of the new policy, private and selfgoverned institutes are witnessing a radical shift from being perceived as affiliated to a more self-reliant structure. This ‘autonomy’ will now bring organizations and institutions vested with financial and educational independence, to the brink of corporatism, wherein they are enabled to create additional courses and departments. Disjunctively, without funding from government bodies, institutions will naturally turn to the students. Under the guise of this autonomy and structure, a steep increase in the tuition fee will be witnessed, not just for students in that particular department, but all the students attending that institution. This coupled with the window of multiple exit options at universities will increase the dropout rates which will only exacerbate the already fragmented landscape of the Indian higher education system. Under the multiple exit and entry option, if a student decides to leave mid-course, he/she will bestow appropriate certification for credits earned until that point which will be then be digitally stored in an Academic Bank of Credit [‘ABC’]. A ‘certificate’, a ‘Bachelor’s degree’, a ‘diploma’, and a ‘Bachelor’s Degree with Research’ respectively will be accorded for each year of a four-year course. The financial autonomy resulting in financial burden on students and the availability of certification each year will propel students to consider dropping out. This creates an immense disparity between financially strong and other students where the former has the higher prospects for studies and is reinforced with better opportunities, thus creating an unlikely situation where higher studies become a privilege rather than a basic requirement only for those who can afford it.

Moreover, a centralized education system leading to social exclusion and dilution of the Right to Education Act is only the tip of the iceberg; the government stated that it is proposing to improve the quality and autonomy of higher education, however, is a completely backward move, it is dismantling the University Grants Commission [‘UGC’] which is a core structural and regulatory body for higher education. This will only accelerate the commodification and centralization of education, which is perilous considering the probability of the ruling party thrusting its ideological and capital requirements. This is in fact, not the first time such a move was attempted. The Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government tried to usher similar reforms but was met with strong opposition. The contemporary education reforms have come into being only because they were passed through the backdoor without the consent of the parliament and a proper code of conduct.

While NEP 2020 envisions a transformative sea of changes across India, the arcane passing of the bill and the possibility of augmented malfunctioning in the Indian landscape needs to be ventured into. On a superficial level, this policy will seemingly elevate the economic rift in a country that is already dissected by wealth, caste, religion, and gender.

 The policy apparently envisages centralizing young Indian mindsets; however, a pertinent question that arises is whether that can paint the education system of the country with the hues of saffron? In this scenario, interdisciplinary, overall learning, multidisciplinary, holistic, could be a decoy to camouflage all the above-mentioned aspects. It will take ample time before this policy goes into full swing, letting the complexities rise to the surface. The procedure of its implementation will be put to test to decide its outcome. The drawbacks in this policy need to be addressed with a stringent and disciplined code of conduct to reduce the current deficiencies and prevent future adversities.

One of the critical fixes is to make the professionals equipped for changing situations. Professional education is the part and parcel of the overall higher education system; for professionals to take on the mantle, a skillset comprising education in the ethic, the importance of public purpose, interdisciplinary thinking, critical analysis, debate, innovation, and research must be inculcated and put to play. This can be surmountable if professional education does not suppress the individual’s forte. Selfgoverning bodies like the agricultural universities, health science universities, technical universities, legal universities, and autonomous institutions in other fields, must aim to become bodies propounding multidisciplinary education. All institutions offering either general or professional education will aim to naturally evolve into clusters in a centralized manner by the end of 2030. Legal education needs to be competitive globally, embracing novel practices, and espousing new technologies for extensive access and timely delivery of justice. Proactively, it must be enshrined with Constitutional attributes of Justice –Political, Social, and Economic, aimed towards national reconstruction through orchestration of rule of law, human rights, and democracy.

 Another dire issue to be addressed is of the English language which is not only paramount for global competitiveness but is also necessary for communicating and connecting with people from other states in India. In the new scheme, English will only be offered from the secondary level. Discontinuing English as the primary medium of teaching and learning can hamper competition on a global level mostly where English is the parent/ first language. Career building, outsourcing technical support, and skills are hegemonized by the western countries where English has the utmost importance. Consequentially, students from impecunious families in India will not have strong communication attributes along with a low grasping power compared to the rest. This usually happens due to the lack of affordability of tuitions and students not being able to hone the English language ultimately growing averse to it. A disadvantage persists to the lower caste who see this language as a medium to escape caste hierarchy.

Additionally, it is also alleged that this policy promotes centralization because this policy has a point that states that a new teacher’s training board will be set up for all kinds of teachers in the country and no state can change. Further, the curriculum for legal studies must mirror the socio-cultural contexts with an evidence-based manner, history, legal principles and jurisprudence. Institutions offering legal education must consider offering bilingual education in English and in the language of the State where the institution is situated.

The Interplay of NLUs and NEP

The advent of the National Law Universities [‘NLUs’] for legal education in India has often been censured for fostering entitlement and remaining inaccessible and isolated to most of the law aspirants. A cursory glance examination of the system is enough to exemplify that the criticism is not bereft of merit. Voices have been pedestaled on multiple occasions to increase the diversity in and of NLUs. Most of these concerns were at the earliest expressed by late Prof. Shamnad Basheer, who through the establishment of Increasing Diversity by Increasing Access to Legal Education [‘IDIA’] attempted to equip and intercept some of these issues. However, these points of concern have suffered the consequences and costs of insufficient and slow institutional reforms. Moreover, a deeper analysis of recommendation, however, reveals flaws in design and possible implementation.

Into the bargain, one of the primary recommendations of the policy is regarding a multi-disciplinary institute which acts like a double-edged sword which can either provide law students with the opportunity to interact with students and scholars from different fields and thus develop a more varied understanding of the law or lack the practicality of this facet to be warranted with the shortage of physical space, and deficiency of financial support. Most NLUs are, however, already facing space crunch and are unable to shelter the existing batch of students within the campus vicinity. They are working in a self-reliant model with limited funding from the state governments. In such cases, forcing them to open up new departments could further drive up their costs and hence decrease accessibility. Cluster model could function better for these institutes. The policy, however, does not elaborate on how these clusters shall operate.

The recommendation to promote bilingual teaching in state law universities is commendable, though it has certain pitfalls. The policy is intended towards implications to the state institutes offering legal education, which makes it applicable to the NLUs. As envisaged, the appointment bilingual teachers based on the regional language of the place could help to translate legal materials for students familiar with the respective language and also for the courts which function mostly in English. However, it disentangles the problem of a language barrier for NLU students only to a restricted extent. Though it certainly helps a student, who is studying at an NLU situated in her region, it turns a blind eye to account for people who could be taking admission in different states. De-emphasizing English as against regional languages is not the solution for legal education. To address this issue, it is necessary not merely to introduce bilingual education throughout, but to also start extra remedial courses/classes for English as it is the primary language used in the legal field.

The most pressing issue exists with the third recommendation in the NEP. The statement prima facie materializes to be a reaffirmation of the Constitutional ethos in legal education. However, phrases like national reconstruction and socio-cultural contexts that stipulate further travesties. While the term socio-cultural context finds its explanation in the policy, it does not throw any light on the exact meaning of national reconstruction.

The revised NEP as it elaborates, states, “It is the function of legal education to transmit the foundational values of Indian democracy to learners to give legal studies the necessary social relevance and acceptability.”

 Novelty cannot be refurbished by looking at history and culture for understanding the legal aspect. Historical context has been jurisprudentially recognized as an important aspect of legal theory by scholars. The draft policy passed over all other aspects of law and tends to over-emphasize on culture, mythology, and tradition. The usage of the term “has to fall back upon culture and traditions” cannot be disregarded as a mere statement. The government on multiple stages has expressed its desire for reviving the Vedic traditions and Hindu sentiments. Taking this in the background, the verbatim of culture, mythology, and tradition while discussing legal education portrays an alarming situation. The draft further asserted that law cannot be independent of culture and states the study of classical law texts. Some of these texts, being the prominent have fallen into ignominy for cultivating an outdated and discriminatory frame of mind. Revisiting these texts in the educational framework shall do more harm than good to legal education. With assertion, it is true to say that the law is a memory, and hence has to derive from its past; but at the same time, some memories can only function as a reminder for the need to progress and cannot text to rely upon for the study of law.

It is noteworthy that the policy when dealing with legal education makes no recommendation towards making law schools more comprehensive. It remains tranquil on both the questions of caste and gender in graduate as well as in postgraduate studies. Its recommendations can potentially enhance concerns.

Hawk-Eyed View

 A nagging question that remains is whether there is more to this policy which was unceremoniously adopted by the Union cabinet without any juridical application of mind? Though the vital reforms required in the education sector, such as widening the availability of scholarships, strengthening infrastructure for open and distance learning, online education and increasing usage of technology are reflected in the new policy, it is also categorized as a political document which can be comprehended from the remarks of political and ideological organizations.

As education is catalogued under the concurrent list, laws made subsequent to this list are first put up as drafts for a minimum threshold period. This threshold period is to stimulate suggestions and discourse from the states or distinguished personalities from the respective field of the draft bill. However, the NEP 2020 was bypassed in the parliament, thereby violating the above-mentioned code of conduct and procedure. A new inherent policy introducing such substantial changes in the country must endure discourse in the parliament. Can this be visualized in the light of an existing ruptured system of higher education being replaced with the decoy of a commercialized and centralized education system?

Altogether the NEP policy on legal education, like most of its other policies is quite like a pie in the sky – agreeable to comprehend but implausible to be realized. It does change things academically and theoretically, but to implement them in real life is going to be a very onerous task. This policy needs to be followed in its spirit to realise its intricate benefits.

The Daily Guardian is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@thedailyguardian) and stay updated with the latest headlines.

For the latest news Download The Daily Guardian App.

Policy & Politics

Mera Aadhar, Meri Pehchaan: Privacy and security concerns

Ritansha Laxmi

Published

on

Privacy, a right essential to sovereignty of an individual and also the protection of human dignity.1 Privacy authorizes individual to make barriers around and to manage boundaries, protecting themselves from unwarranted interference in the lives, and allows people to be who they are exactly and the way they would like to interact with the world around them. Privacy helps people to create boundaries around them to restrict who has access to their body, places and things, as well as the communications and information. And State being the duty bearers for the protection of privacy.2 Therefore, the role of the state is to strike a balance between freedom and protection, rights and responsibilities. In 2001 a meeting of ministers headed by

L.K. Advani presented its report in May and acknowledged proposal for an id card, Aadhaar an identification card having 12- digit number.3 It was then issued by the government of India to each individual residing in the country. However, it has come across some privacy issues from different sections of society. Issuance of unique identification number with an aim to provide its every individual with different schemes like gas subsidy, MGNREGA, Jan Dhan yojna like benefits but it clubbed with breaching the privacy of an individual, moreover the informational privacy of the people.4 This article attempts to explore the security and privacy concerns from the perspective of people, legal and Government on Mera Aadhar, meri pehchan thereby trying to settle whether there is an infringement of the privacy or not?

AADHAAR, A BRIEF INTRODUCTION:

The conception of idea about Aadhar card came into existence in 2004 with the amendment of citizenship act by the then ruling Indian National Congress (INC) led UPA government to make a way for the National Population Register (NPR)5, a database record of all the residents of India preserved by the Census Commissioner of India and Register General. With the administrative approval for the project, Unique ID for Below Poverty Line (BPL) families by the ministry of Communication and Information Technology, the first work regarding issuing Unique IDs to BPL residents of India truly started in the year, 2008.6 It saw the amalgamation of National Population Register (NPR) under the Citizenship Act, 1955 with the UID project to comprehend Aadhaar card.7 While discussing the legal viewpoint, some jurists in their verdicts have dealt with diverse facets of privacy with regards to Aadhar and its linking, concerning the security and privacy threats.8 The judgments concerning privacy issues would be going to help as a brick for development of the idea of protection of privacy for the people of India. With these judgements and recommendations, the safe, secure, socially and politically justified legal framework can be created protecting privacy.

The perspective according to government is that it contends that the fundamental right status does not make privacy the absolute right and hence is archaic by other major apprehensions of the nation state that is to say national security of its people, frauds and fake registrations of people.

The Supreme Court in its judgment of K.s Puttaswamy9 has overruled verdicts given in the Kharak Singh case and the M.P. Sharma case, both of which said that the right to privacy is not protected under the constitution of India. On 27 March 2017, the supreme Court directed that Aadhaar card mandatory for availing benefits under welfare schemes and it cannot be done without aadhaar number. Though government tried to check every possibility of making it compulsory for other purposes such as income tax filings, bank accounts, sim card purpose etc. In April 2017, a constitution Bench of the supreme court taking into consideration the legality of Aadhar on the ground of right to privacy. A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court has given verdict that citizens of India enjoy a fundamental right to privacy that it is intrinsic to life and liberty and covered under Article 21 of the constitution of India.10 Regarding privacy issue the Supreme court directed concerned government authorities not to share personal information of Aadhar card holders with any private or unauthorized sources.

Analysing the judgement of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs Union of India and Ors., 2017 & 2018 pertaining privacy issues:

In the year 2017, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India11 passed a landmark judgment upholding the constitutional right to privacy. It acknowledged privacy, an essential component of the Constitution of India under Part III of it, which lays down the fundamental rights, ranging from rights concerning to equality, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, protection of life and personal liberty etc. These rights which are fundamental in nature cannot be given or taken away by law, and all laws and administrative actions must stand by these fundamental rights. The Supreme Court proclaimed that the government must cautiously balance individual privacy and the legitimate concerns of the state, even if national security is at stake. The Court also declared that any incursion on privacy must satisfy the triple test, established i.e.,

1. Need12, legitimate state concern is necessary. The law should seek to achieve a legitimate aim of the state.

2. Proportionality13, in least invasive manner. There should be a balanced relationship between the objects and the means adopted to achieve them. The degree of interference must be proportional to the need and;

3. Legality14, backed by law. The existence of a Law.

The judgement of K.s Puttaswamy which has been signed by all nine judges, holds: The decision in M P Sharma15 and Kharak Singh16 both stands over-ruled and uphold that the right to privacy considered as an intrinsic part of the right to life & personal liberty under Article 21, Part III of the Constitution of India. This verdict has re-shaped the domain of fundamental rights in the constitutional history of India. It has given the government of India an opportunity to re-think its data protection mechanism, both in light of individual privacy and the welfares of the state.

While analysing the “Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd) and Another versus Union of India and Others,2018” also called as Aadhaar judgement17, and applying the above triple test proposed in previous judgement to the Aadhar scheme, A five-judge constitution bench test the validity of Aadhaar from the aspect of privacy as a Fundamental Right held that Aadhaar would remain obligatory for filing of Income Tax returns(ITR) and applying for allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN), and it would not be mandatory to link Aadhaar to bank accounts and the telecom service providers cannot demand for Aadhar number for the purpose of its linking for mobile connections.18

The judges of supreme court in this case also held that there is a need to introduce a data protection regime in India. The Judges conferred the right to privacy with respect to the protection of informational privacy and the right to preserve individual reputation.19 Also held that privacy is one of the most important rights to be protected both against both State and non- State actors and be recognized as a fundamental right subjected to some restrictions like national security. Also, the decision makes it clear that the Indian Government is now concerned to establish an online data protection regime for the protection of the privacy of every people which is need of the hour and also as India is lagging behind in online data privacy regime i.e., proper laws and regulations regarding collection, preservation, and compliance of personal data and related enforcement mechanisms.

The population who are being asked to link their personal documents, identity and information to their Aadhar Card have to decide between two conflicting options of Advantages to the Society in general of which they are a part, and loss of their personal privacy. It is considered as a trade-off without monetary benefits.

CONCLUSION

It is well known fact that India does not have a law on privacy till now. In fact, then chairman of UIDAI, Nandan Nilekani, penned to the Prime Minister in May 2010 recommending the need of a data protection and privacy law in India.20 Therefore, the privacy bill should be the primary action towards the issues of breach in privacy. Correspondingly, people should be educated on the risk involved with ID thefts and fraud happening in digital world. IT laws should be strengthened and the liability should be bounded on companies handling data to escape the mishap from data mishandling. Some of the recommendations which I believe is important are, First, Aadhar should focus and incorporate privacy by design itself, the technology and process towards collecting privet information should be protected parallelly. Second, there is a need of collecting minimum set of data that would be sufficient from residents, like name, age, address of resident and thumb impression. Third, Prohibiting the extensive use of Aadhar number for every authentication or Proof of document. Use of Aadhar number should be only for required purpose like linking with direct subsidy and welfare schemes from central or state government example: Gas subsidy, BPL subsidy schemes etc.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Private sector to play prominent role leveraging technologies like 5G and satellite communication

Speaking at the conference, P. Balaji Summit Co-Chairman and Chief Regulatory & Corporate Affairs Officer, Vodafone India said that with 5G on the anvil, IoT and AI will unleash the next digital revolution helping India meet our trillion dollar digital economy goal in the coming years.Private sector to play prominent role leveraging technologies like 5G and Satellite communication to help in reaching the hinterland more effectively and efficiently said by Guest of Honour, Alok Chaturvedi, CEO, CSC Wi-Fi Choupal Service India Pvt. Ltd, MeiTY, GoI. He mentioned that today there are about 3.76 lakh CSC centres in the country covering all Gram Panchayats and important villages run by a village level entrepreneur, a change agent, who could be an individual or an organization promoting rural entrepreneurship and rural employment opportunities. He opined, government has to ensure that quality broadband internet services are availing to the residents in Gram Panchayats and Villages.

Umang Das, Summit Chairman and Chairman, Foreign Investors India Forum in his address said that Govt and the private sector to weave an unpreceded wave of digitisation that will drive Industry 4.0 and significantly improve the day-to-day lives of a billion Indians. The telecom sector is at of the cusp of transformation and Indian tech companies can attract global investors who’ve burnt their hands in Chinese tech companies added by Mr Das.

Peeyush Vaish, Partner & Telecom Leader, Deloitte India in theme introduction mentioned that Convergence amongst the telecom ecosystem with the power of technology will pave the way for bridging the urban−rural divide across sectors, including banking, healthcare and education.

CII -Deloitte paper launched, called “Digital Reset – Touching a billion Indians” aptly highlights the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise business and easing the lives of the common man.

In his address, Amit Marwah, Head of Marketing and Corporate Affairs, Nokia India said, 5G will be a huge leap towards a connected digital society adding value beyond connectivity to economy as well as deliver social impact. He also said that the government, regulators and the telecom industry in India need to collaborate on initiatives that will facilitate faster 5G roll-out and adoption, to accelerate socio-economic growth.

Speaking at the conference, P Balaji Summit Co-Chairman and Chief Regulatory & Corporate Affairs Officer, Vodafone India said that with 5G on the anvil, IoT and AI will unleash the next digital revolution helping India meet our trillion dollar digital economy goal in the coming years. The telecom sector and our network warriors have catalysed the economy in the last 18 months and has fast-tracked digital adoption at an unprecedented scale, both at individual and organizational level and provided a robust platform for the digital society enabling Healthcare, Education, e-Commerce, Fintech and Manufacturing to deliver services to consumers and enterprises highlighted by Mr Balaji.

Space open for Industry further would excite everyone for the future growth translate the potential of IoT into tangible benefits on the ground said by Dr Rishi M Bhatnagar, President, Aeries communications India in his address. IoT projects through solutions would meet various end uses such as improving supply chain efficiency, enhancing customer experience, tracking and monitoring assets, improving logistics and empowering smart cities through a bouquet of solutions added by Dr Bhatnagar.

Peeyush Vaish, Partner & Telecom Leader, Deloitte India in theme introduction mentioned that “ Convergence amongst the telecom ecosystem with the power of technology will pave the way for bridging the urban−rural divide across sectors, including banking, healthcare, and education. CII-Deloitte paper report launched, called “Digital Reset – Touching a billion Indians” aptly highlights the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise business and easing the lives of the common man.

As the industry transcends from ‘digital-first’ to ‘digital-throughout’, technology will play a critical role in creating a ubiquitous presence amongst consumers and diversify revenue streams for enterprises moving “beyond connectivity” built strategically with the strong support and commitment from the GOI towards sustainable growth of the nation”. said by Mr Vaish.

The virtual summit aimed to provide a platform for telecom players to discuss the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise. The conference saw speakers from Quadgen, Ericsson,COAI, Bharti Airtel and others.The summit was attended by over 175 participants

Tarun Nangia

Published

on

Private sector to play prominent role leveraging technologies like 5G and Satellite communication to help in reaching the hinterland more effectively and efficiently said by Guest of Honour, Alok Chaturvedi, CEO, CSC Wi-Fi Choupal Service India Pvt. Ltd, MeiTY, GoI. He mentioned that today there are about 3.76 lakh CSC centres in the country covering all Gram Panchayats and important villages run by a village level entrepreneur, a change agent, who could be an individual or an organization promoting rural entrepreneurship and rural employment opportunities. He opined, government has to ensure that quality broadband internet services are availing to the residents in Gram Panchayats and Villages.

Umang Das, Summit Chairman and Chairman, Foreign Investors India Forum in his address said that Govt and the private sector to weave an unpreceded wave of digitisation that will drive Industry 4.0 and significantly improve the day-to-day lives of a billion Indians. The telecom sector is at of the cusp of transformation and Indian tech companies can attract global investors who’ve burnt their hands in Chinese tech companies added by Mr Das.

Peeyush Vaish, Partner & Telecom Leader, Deloitte India in theme introduction mentioned that Convergence amongst the telecom ecosystem with the power of technology will pave the way for bridging the urban−rural divide across sectors, including banking, healthcare and education.

CII -Deloitte paper launched, called “Digital Reset – Touching a billion Indians” aptly highlights the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise business and easing the lives of the common man.

In his address, Amit Marwah, Head of Marketing and Corporate Affairs, Nokia India said, 5G will be a huge leap towards a connected digital society adding value beyond connectivity to economy as well as deliver social impact. He also said that the government, regulators and the telecom industry in India need to collaborate on initiatives that will facilitate faster 5G roll-out and adoption, to accelerate socio-economic growth.

Speaking at the conference, P Balaji Summit Co-Chairman and Chief Regulatory & Corporate Affairs Officer, Vodafone India said that with 5G on the anvil, IoT and AI will unleash the next digital revolution helping India meet our trillion dollar digital economy goal in the coming years. The telecom sector and our network warriors have catalysed the economy in the last 18 months and has fast-tracked digital adoption at an unprecedented scale, both at individual and organizational level and provided a robust platform for the digital society enabling Healthcare, Education, e-Commerce, Fintech and Manufacturing to deliver services to consumers and enterprises highlighted by Mr Balaji.

Space open for Industry further would excite everyone for the future growth translate the potential of IoT into tangible benefits on the ground said by Dr Rishi M Bhatnagar, President, Aeries communications India in his address. IoT projects through solutions would meet various end uses such as improving supply chain efficiency, enhancing customer experience, tracking and monitoring assets, improving logistics and empowering smart cities through a bouquet of solutions added by Dr Bhatnagar.

Peeyush Vaish, Partner & Telecom Leader, Deloitte India in theme introduction mentioned that “ Convergence amongst the telecom ecosystem with the power of technology will pave the way for bridging the urban−rural divide across sectors, including banking, healthcare, and education. CII-Deloitte paper report launched, called “Digital Reset – Touching a billion Indians” aptly highlights the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise business and easing the lives of the common man.

As the industry transcends from ‘digital-first’ to ‘digital-throughout’, technology will play a critical role in creating a ubiquitous presence amongst consumers and diversify revenue streams for enterprises moving “beyond connectivity” built strategically with the strong support and commitment from the GOI towards sustainable growth of the nation”. said by Mr Vaish.

The virtual summit aimed to provide a platform for telecom players to discuss the relevance of technological advancements like 5G technology that are poised to act as a key enabler and contributor to the success of the enterprise. The conference saw speakers from Quadgen, Ericsson,COAI, Bharti Airtel and others.The summit was attended by over 175 participants

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Key legal challenges associated with artificial intelligence in India

Naina Pachnanda

Published

on

INTRODUCTION

Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as “AI”) and related technologies are crucial to the business ecosystem and are permeating into every sector. As AI gains more control over common subjects and services, it is bound to become potentially unpredictable and cause harm. While research on AI is being conducted all over the world, there are certain potential legal questions raised when it comes to the usage of AI. These range from criminal liability to data privacy concerns. This article addresses some of the key legal issues that crop up with respect to AI, across different sectors, as with an exciting new generation of AI solutions being developed it is essential that the same is regulated by a legal framework which allows AI to make the best possible impact in the economy.

In the event that there exists no legal definition for Artificial Intelligence, for the purpose of this article, Artificial Intelligence is defined as “a constellation of technologies that enable machines to act with higher levels of intelligence and emulate the human capabilities of sense, comprehend and act.”

Before one aims to pin point issues that arise with respect to an AI technology and attribute any liability to an AI technology, it is essential to determine the nature of the AI’s existence. This becomes important as the attribution of any liability would be based on the status granted to the AI in the country. To ensure their accountability under the law, AI entities could be treated as legal personalities, like corporations. Corporate liability of an individual was limited to motivate people to engage in commercial activities through corporations. The same principle could be extended to AI entities. This enables a number of advantages to the existing legal system to tackle upcoming challenges by AI without the need to make drastic changes in the legal system, to effectively solve AI related problems as AI developers are largely concerned about the liability arising from its actions.

KEY LEGAL

CHALLENGES

As mentioned above, assuming that an AI technology is given the status of legal personhood, in India, principles of tort law may be applied, in case of default by the AI technology. When an AI software is defective or use of such software injures the party using the software, it results in legal proceedings under the tort principle of negligence. In the case of AI, the software developer/programmer owes a duty of care to the customer/user. It is of course difficult to decide on the standard of care to be owed to the customer/user. The kind of software being implemented might assist in deciding the standard of duty of care that may be attributed to the software developer/programmer. For instance, if the system involved amounts to an “expert system” the befitting standard of care that would be that of an expert or a professional. Similarly, we could reason that if a person can be held liable for the wrongdoing of a human helper, the recipient of such support could be equally liable if they outsource their duties to a non-human helper instead, considering that such delegation is equally advantageous to them. The policy contention is quite compelling that using the assistance of a self-learning and autonomous machine should not be treated any differently from employing a human auxiliary, if such assistance leads to the harm of a third party . However, to hold the principal liable for the wrongdoing of another, it may be challenging to determine the standard against which the operations of non-human helpers will be assessed in order to emulate the degree of misconduct, as in human auxiliaries. The potential standard should take into consideration, that in many areas of application non-human auxiliaries are more safe and less likely to cause damage to others than human beings, and the law should at least not dissuade their relevance.

Again, assuming that an AI technology is granted the status of a legal person, the AI technology can be held liable under the criminal law system. For criminal liability to be established both the elements of mens rea( mental element) and actus reus (physical act) are essential to be present. The pertinent question that arises here is that how does an AI technology fulfil these two essential aspects of criminal liability? And how is an AI technology liable directly for the commission of an offence?

Assuming an AI is an innocent agent , the obvious question that arises is that who shall be held liable for the crime committed? Here there are two candidates at play, i.e. the programmer of the Al software and the user of the AI software. A programmer of an Al software might design a program in order to commit offences through the Al entity. Both the programmer or the user do not perform any physical act in the commission of the crime and therefore, they do not meet the actus reus requirement of the offence. The legal result of this is that the programmer and the user should be criminally liable, as the principle of mens rea or malafide intention is attributed to them for the specific offence committed, while the Al entity has no criminal liability whatsoever.

In another scenario, assuming there is excess involvement of the programmers or the users in the day to day activities of the Al entity, but without any intention of committing an offence by way of the Al entity, negligence or recklessness should be considered as the standard of mens rea.

Yet another viewpoint suggests that an Al algorithm might have many characteristics and qualifications that exceed those of an average human being, but all such qualities are not essential in order to impose criminal liability. As far as a human or a corporation is concerned, if they are able to fulfil both the essentials of the mental and physical elements, only then can criminal liability be imposed. Similarly, if an AI technology is capable of fulfilling both the essentials of mens rea and actus reus, then criminal liability can be imposed on the AI as well. So long as an AI technology, controls a mechanical or other mechanism to move its moving parts, any act by the AI technology here may be considered as performed by the Al technology itself, thereby fulfilling the requirement of the physical component, i.e. actus reus. As far as the mental element or mens rea is concerned, the only essential requirements that need to be fulfilled under the general ambit of criminal law are knowledge, intent, negligence, etc. Knowledge is defined as sensory reception of factual data and the understanding of that data. Most Al technologies are well- prepared for such kind of reception. The process of analysis in Al systems parallels that of human understanding. The cognitive ability of the human brain understands the data received by senses such as eyes, ears, hands, etc., by analyzing that data. Similarly, advanced AI algorithms are trying to emulate human cognitive patterns. Therefore, if a human being can be held criminally liable for an offence by fulfilling the two criteria of intention and physical act, why should an AI be exempt from the same?

Another potential legal issue that crops up is that of the AI being defective in nature. This attracts product liability. As per the concept of product liability in case of any defect in the product, the manufacturer or the seller of the product is to be held liable for any defect in the product. However, as far as equating an AI technology to a product is concerned, the question that often pops up is that is it fair to hold the creator liable for any injury or harm caused by the AI, as this would inevitably draw an analogy with the principle of strict liability. It is essential that all AI technologies should have limits placed on their ability to cause harm, and it could be argued that there is no better person than the creator to be able to prevent any such harm caused by the AI as well as compensate for any financial losses resulting from such harm.

With an increasing shift in business towards the digital set up, and an increase in the demand of software products, another area of concern, is that of Intellectual Property Rights, particularly the Patent law. As far as protection of AI innovation is concerned, the Patent Act,1970 currently provides protection only to the true and first inventor, which implies a legal person , which includes either a natural person or an artificial person, i.e. a corporation. Section 3(k) of Patent Act 1970 clearly states that “mathematical or business method or computer programme per se or algorithms are excluded from patentability. However, in the recent order by a quasi-judicial body, in the case of Ferid Allani v Union of India has stated that computer inventions that meet the criteria of a ‘technical effect’ , are patentable under the law. This order opens the doors for an enormous corpus of innovation to now become protectable and more valuable as patent protection for innovations in India is essential to foster innovation.

Any discussion on AI is incomplete without addressing the issue of data protection. The functioning of AI is based on the dataset that is used to train the AI’s actions. Therefore, it is essential that such data should be utilized in a safe manner. Since there is a wide range of data collected at an individual’s end, to be utilized, the problem lies with respect to the safe usage of such data. In the event that the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 ( hereinafter referred to as “PDP Bill”), is pending before Parliament, the Information Technology Act, 2000 alongside the Information Technology(Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011 provide a framework, for protection of sensitive personal information, as far as body corporates are concerned. This apart, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology ( hereinafter referred to as “MeitY”) has acknowledged the imbalance with a few companies dominating the market and has recommended that there should be mandatory data sharing mandatory to open up competition in any concerned sector enabling startups, or for other community/ public interest purposes. This is to ensure startups and small medium enterprises are given equal opportunity as compared to big corporate giants and there is no monopoly by corporate giants.

CONCLUSION

Given that AI is a growing industry and India has a tremendous corpus of AI innovators, with the development of an imaginative legal framework to govern the same, AI innovation can be safely unlocked and fostered, in a fashion that is safe and yet dynamic.

DISCLAIMER

The views expressed in this article are that of the author alone and do not reflect the views by any organization.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

INDIA-ASEAN TRADE COULD REACH US$200 BN: PIYUSH GOYAL

Tarun Nangia

Published

on

Piyush Goyal

Addressing trade barriers could take India-ASEAN trade to USD 200 billion, stated Piyush Goyal, Minister of Commerce & Industry, Consumer Affairs & Food & Public Distribution and Textiles, Government of India, while addressing the Indo – ASEAN Business Summit & Expo organised by Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) in partnership with the Ministry of External Affairs on 7 – 8 October, 2021.

The Minister stated that India considers ASEAN a valued partner and has contributed to the ASEAN COVID-19 Response Fund. He highlighted that during the pandemic India had not only met international service commitments, but had also shown to the world its capabilities of self-sufficiency by producing critical medicines, medical equipment, and vaccines, for domestic and export purposes, which has earned India the reputation of being the ‘pharmacy of the world.’

Today, 70 percent of the world’s vaccines are manufactured in India and the country’s prowess in producing affordable, standardised medicines make India a strong partner in mitigating the global health risks that are a top priority of Governments, affirmed Shri Goyal. India’s business friendly policies under the ambit of the Aatmanirbhar Bharat vision with Production Linked Incentive schemes amounting to USD 30 bn constituting APIs, drugs and medical devices open up a plethora of investment and partnership opportunities, he opined.

The India-ASEAN bilateral trade has grown significantly and stands at USD 80 bn and we should look at taking this to USD 200 bn. This is possible with strong collaborations between the countries and addressing the impediments on the way, said Shri Goyal. Misuse of the trade agreement including by third parties should be discouraged and this could instil more confidence in both sides to reduce tariffs for inter-ASEAN and Indian trade, he added.

Ministers from 7 ASEAN countries addressed the session.

Utilisation of digital and technology, especially in the 4th industrial revolution era can further strengthen the supply chain. One of the areas that we must work on is to build a vibrant and resilient supply chains through deeper trade and investment in the region, said H E Dr Khampheng Saysompheng, Hon’ble Minister of Industry and Commerce, Lao PDR. There must be a reduction in trade barriers such as non-tariff and technical trade barriers to ensure constant flow of goods and skilled man force across countries, he added.

Cambodia is highly committed to cooperating with India and ASEAN to seize the opportunity to make an environment for sustainable development, said H E Mr Chhuon Dara, Secretary of State, Ministry of Commerce, Royal Government of Cambodia. Enhancing trade efficiency through improving competitiveness by further strengthening the current trade facilitation mechanism is beneficial for trade within the region to be fast-flowing and efficient, he added.

India remains one of ASEAN’S largest trading partners, said H E Yang Berhormat Dato Seri Setia Dr Awang Haji Mohd Amin Liew bin Abdullah, Minister of Finance and Economy, Brunei Darussalam.

Please read concluding on thedailyguardian.com

Bilaterally, Brunei Darussalam has a steady trade economic relationship with India. In 2020, India is our 6th largest trading partner with a total trade value of over 583 million USD, he stated.

FTAs and enhanced economic cooperation are important, said Ramon Lopez, Secretary, Department of Trade & Industry, Philippines. Philippines looks forward to a more strategic, and wider economic partnership with India and ASEAN. ASEAN & India can work with other trading partners to seize the opportunity, he stated.

We should enhance economic cooperation through capacity building and technical assistance programmes, workshops, and seminars as well as outreach activities. Making strategic decisions will support the implementation and utilisation of ASEAN India treaty area, said H E Dr Pwint Sann, Union Minister, Ministry of Commerce, Myanmar.

It is important that ASEAN & India join hands in recovering from the adverse impact of the pandemic on the economy of the region, said H E Dr Jerry Sambuaga, Vice Minister of Trade, Indonesia. We need to keep our markets open, especially for medical & healthcare products and other essential goods, encourage trade facilitation, digital economy, produce assistance to our MSMEs, he added.

With the combined population of 2 billion people and the combined GDP of USD 5.6 trillion, ASEAN and India should work closely together to ensure open trade development and enhance entrepreneurial competitiveness, said H E Dr Sansern Samalapa, Vice Minister for Commerce, Thailand. Both sides should seek to transform farmers into smart farmers by making digital technology an integral part of their farming operations, he added.

Both India and ASEAN are home to rapidly growing markets and have a number of emerging opportunities in common sectors of interest including manufacturing, human development, logistics and transport, retail and human development, among others. Both sides together can contribute to building and diversifying supply chains, noted Mr T V Narendran, President, CII and CEO & Managing Director, Tata Steel Limited.

Business cooperation between India and ASEAN in areas of mutual interest such as FinTech, start-ups, and innovation, empowerment of youth and women and the development of MSMEs are important factors to take this multilateral connection to a higher growth trajectory, said Chandrajit Banerjee, Director General, CII.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Sr. Adv. Vivek Tankha (MP) requests Australian High Commissioner for Diwali as optional holiday, reduction of fees for Indian students

Tarun Nangia

Published

on

Sr. Adv. Vivek Tankha (MP), met Barrt O Farrell, the Australian High Commissioner to India on October 14th at Tankha’s residence. He requested Farell that it would be a great gesture if Government of Australia could kindly consider the Diwali day, November 4th, 2021 as an “optional holiday” in Australia for the people of Indian origin and similarly placed persons since it is a day of rejoicing and festivity. Also, he requested for working towards getting direct flight services operational for New Delhi to Sydney or Melbourne. Tanka also highlighted that the fee charged from Indian students in Australia is much more than what is charged from local residents, and requested it to be reduced.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Freedom of speech and expression on social media: Exploring the contours of a new paradigm

The innate relationship between FSE and social media has been explained aptly by Barlow. According to him, the internet promotes democratic values and gives its users an opportunity to express and share views and opinions with other people of the world. ‘That has made it the best place for self-expression.’

Published

on

I . INTRODUCTION The shift from Times of India to Twitter, from job update corners of the daily newspaper to LinkedIn, from collecting photos in photo albums to Facebook and Instagram posts, from All India Radio to all time accessible YouTube, & from writing letters to texting on WhatsApp, this age of digitalization has revolutionized the life of all human beings. ‘Trending’, ‘texting’, ‘story’, ‘status’ etc. are the buzzwords of the 21st era. Expressing one’s views on social media is deeply related with the non-instrumental theory of freedom of speech and expression (for short ‘FSE’).

In this backdrop, it becomes quite pertinent to understand the pros and cons of the transformation brought by social media. In this article, the author endeavors to explain social media, FSE and their relationship with each other. Furthermore, it deliberates over the new challenges posed by social media, questions the ability of existing laws to curb them and then provides some probable solutions to tackle the same.

II. SOCIAL MEDIA VIS A VIS THE NON – INSTRUMENTAL THEORY Social media is an online platform where users from all over the world present their opinion freely by commenting, uploading and sharing their views in the form of text messages, photographs, and video or audio clips. Its features like openness, participation and interactivity are some crucial reasons behind its worldwide popularity. In the status quo, it is one of the most used tools for communicating and expressing one’s belief and opinion. The US judiciary in Reno v. ACLU has held that the written, spoken and visual expression posted on the internet is protected under the First Amendment. It further said that internet is “the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed.” The Indian Supreme Court in the case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India has also held that citizen’s right of FSE over the internet is constitutionally protected.

The jurisprudence behind validation of FSE over the internet emanates from the non-instrumental theory. According to this theory, “speech and expression are essential to the development of the autonomy of an individual regardless of their utility and this is a desirable end in and of itself.” In layman terms, FSE helps a human being attain self-fulfillment by providing him/her the “right to rebelliously, vigorously and practically converse one’s mind”. FSE is not a means to achieve something but an end in itself. It provides the capability to articulate one’s views and opinions and present them sensibly and audaciously in front of others. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also affirmed the same in the following words; “Freedom of expression has four broad social purposes to serve: (i) it helps an individual to attain selffulfillment… All members of society should be able to form their own beliefs and communicate them freely to others.” It further elaborated FSE as realization of an individual’s earnest desires and competence.

The innate relationship between FSE and social media has been explained aptly by Barlow . According to him, the internet promotes democratic values and gives its users an opportunity to express and share views and opinions with other people of the world. “That has made it the best place for self-expression.” Everybody is a performer on the stage of social media. It provides all participants (users) an equal and all time accessible platform to put forth their views. The expression of one’s fundamental beliefs and thoughts on social media is not necessarily done to promote democratic values (instrumental theory) but is more inclined towards attaining self-fulfillment & self-realization. The author argues that before the advent of social media the non-instrumental theory didn’t had much relevance in the discussions revolving around FSE but the emergence and rise of social media has provided a strong validation to the same.

III. FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION & ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH SOCIAL MEDIA

In the words of Voltaire, “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it.” These words very aptly summarize the law of FSE enumerated under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. These rights are not absolute and have been restricted with the help of provisions under Article 19(2) . The right to FSE is regarded as an essential step towards attaining liberty and is the hallmark of democracy. It occupies a prominent place in the order of priorities of liberty & is considered as the mother of all liberties. Justice Patanjali Sastri has rightly observed, “Freedom of speech… lays the foundation of all democratic organizations, for without free political discussion no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible” Social media is an important means of communication in the present world. We can’t imagine our lives without these platforms. These platforms transgress all geographical boundaries and help in exchanging and sharing information all across the globe. The reasons behind growth of social media include the increased use of internet, technological advancements, easy accessibility, inexpensive form of media and most importantly free space and ease of participation. It is popular among the youth as it is the best form of networking in the modern times. It helps them in creating their network and grab learning opportunities. It also provides a platform to the citizens of a nation-state to put forth their grievances and concerns & the state also at times has given due acknowledgement to the same. In the recent case of Lipika Pual v. State of Tripura , the Tripura High Court emphatically held that FSE over the internet is constitutionally protected. In this case, Smt. Lipika Paul was working at the post of UDC in the Department of Fisheries, Govt. of Tripura. It has alleged that she has violated Rule 5(4) of the Tripura Civil Services (conduct) Rules,1988 by posting comments on Facebook against a political leader which amounted to canvasing against the said leader. The Hon’ble Court held that the content posted didn’t amount to canvassing. Moreover, the same is protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.

IV. PROS AND CONS OF SOCIAL MEDIA

 As everything has 2 sides, social media too has its own share of praises and criticisms. On the brighter side, it provides voice to all the under privileged sections of the society. It has slowly turned into a powerful tool of protest. Numerous social movements across the globe such as the “Black Lives Matter”, “Arab Spring” , “Occupy Wall Street”, “Shahbag movement” along with various Indian instances such as the “hokkolorob” , “CAA-NRC” agitations, farmers protest, scrapping of Article 370 etc. are a testimony to the important role played by social networking sites in the rise of these movements. It has been aptly stated that “The use of digital media had radically transformed on-line individuals from passive receivers into active shapers of content, from observers of activism into activists themselves.” The Apex Court has also held that FSE on the internet is constitutionally protected and indefinite extension of internet shutdowns shall be unconstitutional as the same is a hurdle in the enjoyment of FSE and hence violates Article 19(1) (a). Dutton has referred the current use of Internet and other digital information and communication technologies as Fifth Estate. He said that “the growing use of related digital technologies and Internet is generating a platform for networking individuals in ways that enable a new source of accountability in government, politics and other sectors. … establishing another independent source of accountability, what has been called as ‘Fifth Estate’.” As aforementioned, social media has turned observers into activists. But the problem occurs when these activists turn into hyper-activists by crossing the realm of law. It has been seen that at times things have turned ugly leading to incidents of riots and mob-lynching. The violence that took place in Bengaluru last year was because of a communal Facebook post , the murder of Nilotpal Das and Abhijit Nath in Assam because of the rumor that they were child-lifters spread through WhatsApp , murder of Kaluram in Karnataka occurred because of a fake video spread through WhatsApp forwards, and other numerous incidents testify the grave dangers posed by social media. According to an India Spend report, out of the 69 mob violence cases reported, 77% of them were the result of fake news forwards. WhatsApp was the chief source of spreading misinformation in 28% or 19 of the 69 cases. These websites are also used for polarization of the masses. They are used to set narratives that are completely opposite to actual realities. These social media platforms can very easily build a positive/negative impression of a person, organization or community. Once the news/information goes “trending”, no one endeavors to do a fact check and accepts the same as truth.

V. SELF REGULATION V. STATE REGULATION Stringent regulations are required to counter the above mentioned problems. The pertinent question here is ‘how’ to do the same. To draw a line between curbing of fake news and regulation of FSE is a difficult task. A straight jacket formula can’t be devised to counter the same. The second issue is the capacity to manage sheer volume of ‘user generated content’. It is an arduous task to fact check all the content generated. The third issue is to devise a way that would stop forwarding of fake messages without intruding the privacy of a person. There are two ways to manage all these issues: i) Self-regulation: Here, self-regulation denotes two meanings. The first meaning corresponds to the social media companies such as Facebook, Twitter etc. These organizations as the owner of such platforms have a bigger onus in terms of managing content and curbing misinformation. Secondly, they are certainly in a better position in managing all these issues and taking appropriate actions as and when required. To narrow down the huge bulk of user generated content, they should keep vigilance on the trending information and when the same is found untrue it should be taken down as soon as possible along with a statement by the organization that the said information lacked authority. They should incorporate appropriate safeguards for curbing fake accounts. The second meaning corresponds to the users that they should always do a preliminary fact check before sharing/forwarding any information on such platforms. ii) State-regulation – The second method is regulation by state through the means of laws, rules and regulations. State being the custodian of the life and limb of all its citizens has a duty to protect them from any mishappenings. In India, the reasonable restrictions imposed under Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution do provide certain safeguards. Along with these, Chapter XI of the Information Technology Act, 2000 also includes provisions for regulating information on social media. However, when the state regulates these platforms, it generally tends to use the same in its own favor and forbids dissenting opinions infringing FSE. At times, actions by the state also amounts to intrusion into a person’s privacy.

VI. CONCLUSION

 Social media has developed as the ‘fifth estate’ of the modern world whereas FSE has been one of the fundamental underpinnings of all libertarian regimes since ages. FSE is the bulwark of democracy and social media platforms strengthen the same by promoting exchange of opinions, views, information, ideas, beliefs and much more all across the globe. The challenge before us is to balance the scales in such a manner so that an individual can enjoy his/her FSE without getting trapped into the cycle of misinformation. The author is of the opinion that self-regulation should be preferred over state regulation because of two prime reasons. Firstly, the owner organizations are in a better position to handle the situation when compared with the state and secondly, when power is in the hands of state it uses the same as a means to silence dissent. Hence, it is high time to promote and practice self-regulation as a means to uphold the principles of freedom of speech and expression.

Continue Reading

Trending