Social media leaves politicos unnerved

If on the one hand, the revolution in information technology has widened the scope of knowledge and dissemination of information, on the other a section of ‘powerful’ politicians has sought to negate it by various means. The arrest of a XI class boy for forwarding an “objectionable” post on Facebook against Uttar Pradesh’s Urban Development Minister Azam Khan has attracted widespread reaction from across the country.

The arrest was made under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act and Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, etc.), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 505 (public mischief) of the IPC.

Growing intolerance among the powers-that-be is sadly becoming a routine affair. Earlier, on March 5, on a complaint by Fasahat Ali, Azam Khan's self-styled 'media in-charge,’ the district police lodged an FIR against Ravinder Kumar Mishra, a tourism officer from Varanasi for uploading “objectionable pictures” of UP Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav, SP supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav and Azam Khan on WhatsApp and other social networking sites. He was booked under similar sections of the Acts.

In 2013, Dalit writer and social activist Kanwal Bharti was similarly arrested by Rampur police for a Facebook post against Khan. He too, was booked under section 66-A of the IT Act Ironically, Khan himself has in the past made many comments that were seen as an intentional insult to a particular religious group. Recall these provoked a breach of peace during the last Lok Sabha elections. Then there was his comment on Kargil which led to public outrage.

Add to these the allegations that he had a role in the Muzzafarnagar riots and records of his derogatory comments against former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, his brother Sanjay Gandhi and of course Narendra Modi. He also allegedly called ‘Bharat Mata’ a witch in the past. Not to speak of his misuse of government machinery by deploying over 100 policemen with sniffer dogs to search for his missing buffaloes!

It appears that the politicians of our country give themselves an absolute right to pass any comment against a person, a religious section or a group of people, however provocative it may be. Recall, Union Minister Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti’s communal remark “Ramzade Vs Haramzade’ which led to an uproar Parliament and she eventually had to express regret. If one looks at the Facebook posts of Dr Subramaniam Swamy, one may easily find controversial contents, enough to attract the provisions of law including Section 66A of the IT Act.

While the politicians seem to simply get away, the common citizen pays a heavy price. Shreya Singal, a law student and other NGOs have petitioned seeking quashing of Section 66 A of IT act. These were filed after two girls in Maharashtra were arrested. It needs to be noted that since the words “objectionable”, “offensive”, “derogatory” are not defined, the section 66A of IT Act can be used by anyone claiming that a particular comment of a person on any social media site is objectionable or offensive etc.

A moot point is that postings on Facebook are private communication within a limited group and therefore these should not be treated as public. Moreover, the government can request the service providers to remove or disable the controversial contents from any social media.

Instead of restrictions, the Government should encourage people to speak out their heart so that it and political parties are aware of ground realities and understand the peoples’ mood. Knowing the peoples’ pulse is a prerequisite of a political outfit to win the support of the masses. And, social media can be its tool. At the same time, the Right to freedom of speech and expression is non-negotiable. It must be upheld and the Government be stopped from playing truant with it.

By:Geetartha Pathak