Law must not silence free speech

In an era saturated with viral content, the proposed Karnataka Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Act reflects a growing urgency to tackle the rampant spread of digital misinformation. The draft bill aims to crack down on fake news, misinformation, and abusive content on social media with severe penalties – up to seven years of imprisonment and fines of up to Rs 10 lakh. The bill proposes special courts and regulatory authorities with far-reaching powers to correct or disable misleading content. Karnataka’s concerns are not misplaced. The World Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risk Report identifies India as the highest-risk country for misinformation. A May 2025 Ipsos study found that Indians are significantly more susceptible to fake news than their counterparts in the US, the UK, or France. The vulnerability is compounded by India’s high social media penetration, where various digital platforms serve as the primary news source for millions. When combined with rising political polarisation, multilingual complexity, and the growing weaponisation of fake content, the threat is real.

Proponents argue that the bill offers a structured and swift framework for combating online falsehoods. By establishing a designated legal framework, the state aims to act swiftly against harmful content. It also aims to protect vulnerable groups and cultural sentiment by banning content deemed obscene, anti-feminist, or disrespectful to Sanatana Dharma. However, this raises an immediate question: what about disrespect to other religions? While the stated intent is to ensure authenticity and promote responsible online behaviour, the proposed law raises significant red flags. Foremost among them is the threat to free speech. The definitions of ‘fake news’ and ‘misinformation’ are vague and subjective, allowing ample room for broad interpretation. While the bill claims to exempt opinions, satire, and religious sermons, these distinctions often become blurred, especially in a politically charged atmosphere. Critics, including the Internet Freedom Foundation, have warned against selective enforcement and the chilling effect such laws can have on dissenting voices.

India already ranks 159 out of 180 countries in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index. Giving a government-appointed body – with the regulatory authority headed by the Kannada and Culture minister – the power to determine truth is not just risky; it could lead to State overreach. Alarmingly, the government bypassed the public consultation process while finalising the draft, raising serious questions about democratic due process. While combating fake news is imperative – given its real-world consequences, from inciting riots to political manipulation – the solution must not become more dangerous than the problem itself. Safeguards, transparency, and judicial oversight must be built into this law. Else, in the name of fighting falsehoods, we may end up silencing the truth.