<p>Opposition MPs in the Rajya Sabha on Friday strongly defended freedom of expression on Facebook and other social media and demanded amendment to Information Technology (IT) Act to make it free from abuse. <br /></p>.<p> <br />However, denying the Act violates right to freedom of expression, IT Minister Kapil Sibal said that the Centre would send an advisory to states to check the misuse of the Act. <br /> The issue came up in the Rajya Sabha both during Question Hour and the post-lunch sitting. <br /><br />In his reply during question hour, Kapil Sibal admitted to misuse of the provision in some states and said the government is considering sending advisory to states that the Police Sub-Inspector should not use the provisions on its own, but only after getting an “approval at certain higher level”.<br /><br />Sibal explain that the provisions are in consonance with laws on freedom of expression and also conforms to the legislative practices in the UK and other countries. However, opposition MPs contested his contention.<br /><br />In the post-lunch sitting, CPM MP P Rajeev moved a resolution for the amendment in Section 66 (A), which provides for punishment up to three years for sending information via electronic mail messages which are grossly offensive, menacing, insulting, dangerous or causing inconvenience.<br /><br />“Section 66A is totally unconstitutional. It goes far beyond Article 19(2) of the Constitution. While the punishment under the IPC for criminal nuisance is only Rs 200, the penalty imposed under Section 66A is imprisonment up to three years,” Rajeev asserted.<br />Subjective interpretation<br /><br />“The phraseology of Section 66A gives enough space for police officers for subjective interpretation and arrests anybody on their posting or sharing or sending e-mails,” he added. <br /><br />He said similar provisions in other countries restricts to electronic communications sent by a person to another person to harass him or her.<br /><br />Rajeev and other members cited misuse of the Act in the case of arrest of a Mumbai girl for her facebook post criticizing the bandh called after the death of Shiv Sena Supremo Bal Thackeray. Her friend who liked the post was also arrested. <br /><br />BJP member Gyan Prakash Pilania asked what was wrong in the girl’s assertion that a bandh was uncalled for in the event of someone’s death due to natural causes.<br /><br />Members of the Upper House also cited cases like arrest of cartoonist Assem Trivedi to indicate the abuse of 66A.</p>
<p>Opposition MPs in the Rajya Sabha on Friday strongly defended freedom of expression on Facebook and other social media and demanded amendment to Information Technology (IT) Act to make it free from abuse. <br /></p>.<p> <br />However, denying the Act violates right to freedom of expression, IT Minister Kapil Sibal said that the Centre would send an advisory to states to check the misuse of the Act. <br /> The issue came up in the Rajya Sabha both during Question Hour and the post-lunch sitting. <br /><br />In his reply during question hour, Kapil Sibal admitted to misuse of the provision in some states and said the government is considering sending advisory to states that the Police Sub-Inspector should not use the provisions on its own, but only after getting an “approval at certain higher level”.<br /><br />Sibal explain that the provisions are in consonance with laws on freedom of expression and also conforms to the legislative practices in the UK and other countries. However, opposition MPs contested his contention.<br /><br />In the post-lunch sitting, CPM MP P Rajeev moved a resolution for the amendment in Section 66 (A), which provides for punishment up to three years for sending information via electronic mail messages which are grossly offensive, menacing, insulting, dangerous or causing inconvenience.<br /><br />“Section 66A is totally unconstitutional. It goes far beyond Article 19(2) of the Constitution. While the punishment under the IPC for criminal nuisance is only Rs 200, the penalty imposed under Section 66A is imprisonment up to three years,” Rajeev asserted.<br />Subjective interpretation<br /><br />“The phraseology of Section 66A gives enough space for police officers for subjective interpretation and arrests anybody on their posting or sharing or sending e-mails,” he added. <br /><br />He said similar provisions in other countries restricts to electronic communications sent by a person to another person to harass him or her.<br /><br />Rajeev and other members cited misuse of the Act in the case of arrest of a Mumbai girl for her facebook post criticizing the bandh called after the death of Shiv Sena Supremo Bal Thackeray. Her friend who liked the post was also arrested. <br /><br />BJP member Gyan Prakash Pilania asked what was wrong in the girl’s assertion that a bandh was uncalled for in the event of someone’s death due to natural causes.<br /><br />Members of the Upper House also cited cases like arrest of cartoonist Assem Trivedi to indicate the abuse of 66A.</p>
