JOIN USAsking citizens to snoop on each other sets dangerous precedent
Cybercrime is a big area of concern for India’s growing digital economy, particularly in these times of pandemic-induced physical distancing. Reports indicate that the Ministry of Home Affairs wants to recruit citizen volunteers for its Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) Scheme. Why has this move generated unease?
Citizen volunteers will be expected to report social media posts connected with child pornography, rape, threats to national security and India’s friendly relations with other countries and content that might disturb public order. Since there is no clear definition of what is anti-national, critics believe that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act could be used to stifle dissent.
The suspicion is understandable. The news of this proposal comes even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently spoke of a brand of dissenters and protestors as ‘andolan jeevis’ and the need to protect the nation from them.
The DDR Museum and the Stasi Museum in Berlin provide ample evidence of what can happen when the state enlists the support of citizens in spying on fellow citizens, including their own families. The secret police, made up of citizen informants, helped the German Democratic Republic maintain files on millions of East Germans. This template is unsuitable for a country like India, which takes pride in being the world’s largest democracy.
Indian citizens are worried because Twitter, the American microblogging and social networking service, has been asked by the Indian government to block hundreds of Twitter handles that are considered inflammatory. The new proposal is also problematic because a programme piloted in Jammu and Kashmir (and Tripura) could be implemented in several states of India. To treat other states at par with a heavily-militarised one conjures up images of police brutality and enforced disappearances. It could create an environment of fear.
Does recruiting citizen volunteers mean that the government is outsourcing its power to non-state actors? It might be too early to draw such a conclusion. However, speculation gains credence because citizens have witnessed numerous instances of ‘gau rakshaks’ or cow vigilantes taking the law into their own hands to terrorise Muslims and Dalits. Citizens with ulterior motives, who want to create communal tensions, can abuse their role as volunteers.
It is important to believe that well-intentioned citizens will sign up, wanting to lend a hand in protecting the integrity and sovereignty of the country they call home. However, it is equally necessary to watch out for people who do not come with the same honourable intentions. To ignore or overlook them would be foolhardy. Having them enrol for a scheme like this would defeat the stated purpose, which is to prioritise security.
People could potentially report false claims in order to settle personal scores, and individuals belonging to minority communities will be rendered vulnerable for no fault of their own. What safeguards are being put in place to ensure that this will not happen? We know from reports in neighbouring Pakistan that religious minorities are regularly dragged into false cases of blasphemy by people who want to exploit their precarious position.
Stand-up comedian Munawar Faruqui is lucky to have been granted bail by the Supreme Court but one cannot overlook the fact that he spent time in jail for a joke he did not crack. Imagine what the fate of others could be when overzealous citizens start snooping on each other. While the community guidelines developed by social media sites are far from flawless, the alternative is not a network of citizen informants spying on behalf of the government.
(Chintan Girish Modi is a writer, educator and researcher who tweets @chintan_connect)
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author’s own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.