Section 66A

Section 66A of IT Act provided for punishment of 3 years for “Offensive” comments posted, propagated through computer, internet etc. Article 19(1)a of constitution has provided for fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression. This right is restricted by article 19(2) which imposes “reasonable” restriction upon such freedom. Such reasonable restrictions include sovereignty and integrity of nation, public order, morality, insult and defamation, security or state, decency and incitement of an offence.

In light of above background let’s debate validity of Sec 66A of IT act. Posting and propagating any message or comment through computer and internet is a form of expression. Communication through internet differs from traditional methods of communication in audience and speed of dissemination. Messages over internet are subjected to very high speed of dissemination and can reach to large number of audience in very short interval of time. “Offensive comment” literally means anything that causes hurt to anyone. Being offended depends upon individual’s personality. Similar comment may leave one unaffected and other deeply hurt. Such wide interpretations make the phrase “offensive comment” very vague in meaning.

Today social media has become important tool to show and propagate one’s dissent, anger and frustration especially over public discourse. Such expression may involve direct or veiled attack upon individuals and institutions. It may be in the form of satire, sarcasm, cartoons etc. In diverse democracy of India everyone can not be expected to be in consent with public affairs. Different point of view ought to exist. This diversity is healthy for Indian Democracy. Vagueness of section 66A gave opportunity to gag such freedom through misuse of statute. Most of the highlighted arrests made under this section had been for trivial issues.

As for as “reasonable restrictions” mentioned under article 19(2) are concerned, there are various laws and sections of IPC to enforce such restrictions. Aggrieved person can approach competent authority under appropriate sections for redressal. Vagueness of said section and availability of other remedies were basis of striking down of it by SC.

However, uniqueness of internet media in terms of audience and speed demands special law to handle misuse of IT. Such law should provide sufficient safeguards against misusing and trivialization. Any intentional hurt caused to anyone should be punished as one’s liberty ends at the point where others’ start. Absolute freedom of liberty should not degrade into absolute liberty.

Absoluteness of Morality

Morality in simple terms means codes concerning with good or bad behaviour. There can not be debate over necessity of morality. What constitutes morality remains topic of contention. Debate over morality raises many questions, most curious question remains over absoluteness of morality. Whether it changes with time and space or there is any universally applicable codes of morality.

Proponents of "subjective morality" argue that acceptability any code of conduct by society makes it moral. They equate acceptability by society with correctness of behaviour. They support point of view that any code is moral because society accepts is as correct. Acceptability by society of any behaviour depends upon prevalence of such behaviour. For example live-in relationship was unacceptable in Indian societies 15-20 years ago thus was considered immoral. With passage of time prevalence of such relationships increased and becoming more and more acceptable at-least in urban societies. Thus this is no more considered immoral. Similarly opposing live-in relationship was considered moral 15-20 years ago, now it becomes immoral. Since composition of society varies with time and space thus morality also varies with time and space. Contemporary societies also differ in their concept of correct conduct. Such subjective conception of morality creates problems for followers of moral conduct. It creates confusion with regards to good conduct. An individual may define moral codes as per his or her convenience. Such like minded individuals may come together and constitute a society and for this society certain act may be justified and may be argued as moral because this "society"accepts it. One of the greatest example of such misuse of acceptability concept is justification of violence, rape, torture by ISIS. As per their code of morality believers of some other faith needs to be slaughtered like animals. Also certain tribes had backing to head hunting. Can such act be ever called moral? This dilemma gives birth to "Objective Morality'.

Concept of "objective morality" believes that moral concepts are absolute. Any deviation from such code of conduct becomes immoral. Problem with such concept is with respect to what are conducts. Is there any compilation of such codes? Can religious scriptures be taken as such compilation? To larger extent answer of this question is yes but there should be reasonable interpretation. Opponents discard religious morality arguing that religion is matter of faith and morality a territory of reason. Such blind opposition fails to assimilate fact that  interpretation of religious texts needs reasoning. Further reasoning may strengthen faith whenever faith is proved. All religions have common teachings like mercy, non-violence, truthfulness etc. Therefore reasonably interpreted texts can act as good guide with respect to moral codes.

Another approach towards morality can be based upon means and ends. Any behaviour can be put to test so as to what are means to commit an act and possible outcomes. If any of means or ends are wrong then such act becomes immoral. This concept also falls under objective morality. Accepting absolute concept of morality avoids problems of subjectivity. Pious concepts of morality can not be left to the mercy of society.

Euphoria of Utopia

Delhi assembly election results have surprised everyone within political spheres and outside as well. National and international media attention has been disproportionate to the de facto political importance of Delhi. Delhi assembly is nothing more than glorified municipality citing geography and demography. Unprecedented mandate given in favour of AAP can best be described as euphoria for utopia. Despite not having much influence on national politics in theory, Delhi results may have serious percussions on Indian politics eventually.

It is easier to label any strategy as poor after retrospective analysis in light of results. Nonetheless such retrospective introspections help to evolve. Loss of BJP can be attributed to multiple factors important ones being negative campaigning by opposition, de facto United opposition, practically defunct Delhi state BJP unit, impatience of voters and lack of understanding of governance.

Central government should have conducted Delhi elections immediately after LS victory. Elections in june-july would have helped BJP in two ways. First they would have escaped from anti-incumbency of 9 months and secondly AAP would not have got opportunity to regroup. AAP has successfully projected itself as anti-establishment party. Right from day one they started maligning BJP and central government especially on unsubstantiated claims of horse-trading, unfairly targeting central government for steep rise in food inflation in july-Aug 2013 when it was barely 2 months in the office, on e-rickshaw issue etc. Rudimentary BJP delhi unit helped AAP with no leader having clean image and credibility. AAP campaign was centred around damaging reputation of BJP and government at centre at any cost be it with help of misinformation, lies or distorted facts be it inflation, issue of Delhi BJP chief's conflict of interest etc. A complete book can be written detailing lies and misinformation spread by AAP in last 9 months.

Congress after decimation in LS elections and 4 state elections thereafter was well aware about their prospects in Delhi elections. Strategy of unified opposition had worked well in Bihar and UP assembly by-polls. It was well evident that only unified opposition can tackle charisma of Modi. Any explicit tie up between AAP and Congress might have won delhi but definitely lost elsewhere. Therefore congress helped implicitly AAP by lacklustre campaign in Delhi. It would not be useless to talk about explicit support by other parties here because although there is no presence of these parties at macro level but there is certain fixed vote bank of these parties at ground level. Thus centralisation of anti-BJP vote is one of the major factor behind defeat BJP. BJP has gained in terms of absolute votes and lost marginally vote share but grievously lost seats.

Delhi BJP unit has been marred with infighting, lack of credible leader and good communicator. On the one hand volunteers of AAP had started door to door campaign as early as September, delhi BJP couldn't match their intensity even after election dates were announced. Lack of credible leader forced BJP to adopt Kiran Bedi in 11th hour as CM candidate. Kiran Bedi is proved excellent administrator. Her entry in BJP decimated personal ambitions of many local BJP leaders. Her loss from safest seat proves the point that she was defeated by BJP. This is not good sign for organisational discipline of BJP. Practically there was no coordination between central and state units of BJP with state unit not only remaining uncooperative, it negatively campaigned as well. No election can be won without cooperation from ground level cadre. AAP succeeded in labelling Mrs Bedi as opportunist, liar etc with little truth but BJP failed to communicate her as good administrator whichnis world known fact. Lack of communication from Mrs Bedi helped AAP to make perception that she will be Remote Control CM if she wins.

Only thing positive in AAP campaign was their manifesto. Detailed reasoned study of manifesto reveals that most of things promised are either poor economics, extreme socialism and out of jurisdiction of Delhi government. People believed AAP manifesto because they don't understand technicalities of governance and economics. Unfortunately we are still following imperial era educational system which was designed to make us literate not educated. It does not develop critical thinking. AAP exploited this ignorance of people. Conservative estimates suggest that execution of AAP manifesto will need around 4 lac crore Rs against budget of 40000 crore Rs. Some of the promises made like full statehood, restructuring DDA are not under jurisdiction of Delhi government. People are expecting subsidised electricity, free water etc. Freebies never come without cost. Untargeted subsidies are not only poor economics but are "reverse robinhood". AAP will blame central government for failure to fulfill promises  made as anti-establishmentism is oxygen of this party.

Landslide victory for AAP should be warning sign for all political parties ajd nation. It shows impatience of voters. 9 months is too little time for reformative measures to yield visible results. Populism of UPA government had weaken fundamentals of economics. Thus it was imperative for new government to strengthen basics. Giving subsidy can yield result immediately butnit takes years to bridge demand supply. This was difference between 9 month and 49 days government. It would not be difficult to chose better ome fro two but impatience of voters has made them up myopic hedonists. It seems they want to enjoy immediately, compromising future without sacrifice. If any population choses freebies over reforms it deserves to be poor. Biggest example of socialism ruining state is that of WB where populism of left ruined the state. Such verdict will force other governments to be populist and which will weaken national economics.

Only good news for BJP is that ita vote bank has remained loyal. It means they still have faith in government. The onle lesson BJP should take from Delhi decimation is it should build disciplined selfless cadre with good dedication and communication skills.

Freedom of expression and its boundaries

Human beings are born free. Freedom is endowed by nature thus right to freedom becomes natural right. There should be no debate whether there is freedom of expression or not however, absoluteness of such freedom is debatable. Along with liberty another natural right conferred is that of equality. Challenge before modern society is to ensure equality of liberty. One's absolute liberty may infringe upon liberty of another person which is against principle of equality of liberty. Thus liberty has to be checked in order to ensure equality.

Freedom to follow one's faith is integral part of freedom of life. Also expression of one's opinion is also a fundamental freedom. Every faith has certain beliefs that are contrary to common sense or science. However such beliefs are fundamental to any religion or sect. Any attack on such beliefs or practices based upon such beliefs is seen as attack on religion itself. However any practice having inhumane aspect should be criticised and attempts to be made to abolish such practice. Reasoned debate and education are helpful in abolishing such practices. Practice of sati has been abolished successfully. However mocking one's faith through any form of expression condemnable. Whether it is painting nude pictures of demigods or cartoon of prophet, it should be condemned and attempts to be made to avoid such things . However vandalism and violence is no answer to such practice. Therefore Charlie Hebedo incident should be criticised. Further making cartoon of prophet and thus hurting religious sentiments of Muslims has to be countered with equal vigour.

In Indian context  freedom of expression is limited by public order and morality. Constitution along with guarantee of freedom of expression puts above limitations.  Further Indian secularism means religious tolerance and equal respect to all religions. Mocking a particular religion is like showing inferiority of such faith. Such acts become unconstitutional as these violate secularism in spirit if not in letter. Further such acts may lead to a situation where certain fanatic groups may exploit sentiments of people and law and order situation may worsen. Thus there has to be reasonable restrictions over our freedom.

Government has responsibility to ensure equal freedom to all thus any government effort to curb freedom is not against concept of free society. Further our right of freedom is associated with duty to respect other's freedom hence there should be self regulated freedom.

Thus all acts like nude paintings of demigods, cartoon of prophet, mocking religious practices by movie etc should not only be avoided  but condemned and punished by law. Its absolutely true that we had freedom but this is not absolute.

Conversion is fundamental right

Constitution has provided for freedom to follow faith and propagate the same. Also it provides for secular nature to be built. India is home to numerous religions and sects. Indian society has deep emotional connection with religion. Western secularism means indifference towards religion in matters of public discourse. Citing emotional attachments with religion application of western context of secularism in Indian society would have not been possible. Secularism has been modified into form of religious tolerance and respect of other religions.

Sanatan dharma or Hinduism is one of the oldest surviving religion on this earth. In fact it has been way of life, an integral component of social and cultural heritage. With spread of Buddhism and Jainism, invasion by various foreign rulers, establishment of mughal rule and British rule, people started converting to other religions due to distorted interpretation of vedic scriptures, karmakand, caste discrimination etc. Thus conversions  have been ongoing process in our nation since centuries.

Religion of a person is determined by birth. Thus there is no freedom to choose primary religion. Therefore blindly forcing a particular religion doesn't go along spirit of freedom of religion. People  by and large follow religion of parents. During conversions too minor children of family are forced upon a particular religion.

A complete freedom to follow religion should start with freedom to choose the faith one wishes to follow. Before such selection one needs to know about all religions for making well informed choice. Therefore everyone should be allowed to change his or her religion during lifetime. Blanket ban of conversions would hamper right to religion which is fundamental right as well as natural right.

However, no one should be preeched to convert by some offer, force or any other benefit. All conversions should be under free and fair environment. Conversion is also part of fundamental freedom to follow one's faith.

Kiss of Love

Article 19 (1) A of Indian constitution provides for freedom of expression. Kissing is an expression of love,  appreciation also a sexual behaviour. there are many ways of kissing ranging from simple peck over forehead or cheeks to intimate passionate kiss. Later being more of sexual behaviour.

Recently a campaign titled "kiss of love" was started as protest against moral policing done allegedly by "right wing " organisations. Here intimate kissing is being used as tool for protest. Prima facie such act of kissing seems to be perfectly fine and legal under our constitutional framework.  But article 19 (2) has imposed certain restrictions over freedom of expression. As per this freedom of expression is limited by public order and morality. Morality is belief of what is right or wrong. nature of the act makes it morally good or morally bad.

As far as kissing is expression of love and appreciation, there is no bar constitutionally or morally on this to be exercised in public place. However any kind of sexual behaviour done in public place is not correct morally thus becomes constitutionally unacceptable.

Further question arises whether kissing can be used as tool for the protest. If we buy the logic of supporters of this campaign then sky is the limit. But we as responsible citizens should see merits of everything objectively. Rights come along with duties. Freedom of expression comes along with duty to exercise such rights in moral way. I agree that cretain organisations do not have rights to decide what is morally right or wrong but running campaign without considering merits and demerits is another extreme.

Its true that we have full liberty but this liberty has to have some limitations. Social morality is one such limitation. If we grant intimate kiss as legitimate way to protest,  then in future similar logic will be used to justify other forms of sexual behaviour in public places. Social morality is set of codes which are acceptable in contemporary society. The society should not be forced to accept something in order to make it socially moral. It has to be morally good in order to be accepted by society.

An analogy

Case1- USA was in hunt of Osama for alleged involvement in 9/11. Assuming all details of assassination of Osama is at least 50% truth, US came to know about Osama's whereabouts 7 days ago. Plan to attack the said place was finalised. After few mock drills, plan was executed with precision and Osama was killed...and "Justice was done" fr US and victims of 9/11.

Case2- If Osama wanted in India....IB with all it's resources gets the whereabouts of Osama. passes the files to home ministry. If at all file is processed, Indian PM calls pak's president and inform about the situation. Pak president demands proof regarding indictment of Osama. Home secretary level meeting is organised. India hands over dossier including red corner notice of Interpol. Pak takes it's own time and studies the report. After gap of 3-4 months pakistan says that evidences are not enough to prosecute Mr. Osama. Another meeting is organized and another set of evidences given. Finally after 3-4 rounds pakistan agrees that Osama is guilty but demands he would be trialed in pakistan's court. India approaches US and after multiple negotiations, US directs Pak to hand over Osama to India...provided Osama is unaware of things going around and stays there. Osama is in India. Indian government celebrates it's "victory of truth".

Now Osama is suffering from senile diseases. He is provided good medical care and security. He is provided with lawyer...and trial begins amidst lots of media coverage....Osama becomes celebrity. After long tedious procedure Osama is awarded death sentence.. Again our PM gives proud speech of victory and how his government succeeded in curbing terrorism.

As per judicial procedure his sentence is confirmed by HC and challenged in SC and his sentence is confirmed. Now old man Osama suffering from multiple old age diseases appeals to president of India for pardon. His files gets stuck up between home ministry and office of president. After some time, passenger plane of India is hijacked by Al-qayeda and terrorists demand release of Osama. Finally Government gives in and exchanges Osama for hundreds of Indians taken hostage. NOW once again "OSAMA IS WANTED IN INDIA".