India won't censor social media: Telecom Minister

Like print and electronic media, they have to obey the laws of the country, says minister.

Afp February 14, 2012

MUMBAI: India does not intend to censor online social networks such as Facebook, a minister said Tuesday, but he demanded that they obey the same rules governing the press and other media.

"I want to say once and for all, without any obfuscation, no government in India will ever censor social media," Telecoms Minister Kapil Sibal told an IT summit in Mumbai.

"I never wanted to censor social media and no government wants to do so. But like the print and electronic media, they have to obey the laws of the country."

He held a number of meetings with leading Internet companies late last year in which he asked about the possibility of checking content before it is posted online by users.

The minister was said to have shown Internet executives examples of obscene images found on the Internet that risked offending Muslims or defaming politicians, including the boss of the ruling Congress party, Sonia Gandhi.

"The media reported I had said I wanted to pre-screen the content on social media. I have never even heard the word pre-screen," he told the summit.

Since these meetings, 19 Internet firms including Google, Yahoo! and Facebook have been targeted in criminal and civil cases lodged in lower courts, holding them responsible for content posted by users of their platforms.

The government has given its sanction for the firms to be tried for serious crimes such as fomenting religious hatred and spreading social discord -- offences that could land company directors in prison.

"All I want is that they (social media) should follow the laws of the land. Social media must not consider itself to be above that," Sibal said.

But Internet privacy groups say social media sites may not have the resources to screen obscene material that violates local laws posted on the Internet.

Local laws prohibit the sale or distribution of obscene material as well as those that can hurt religious sentiments in overwhelmingly-Hindu India.

"It is just not humanly possible to pre-censor content and Sibal knows that very well," said Rajan Gandhi, founder of a New Delhi-based advocacy group Society in Action.

Pranesh Prakash of the Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society said he was "glad Sibal does not believe in censorship and that companies operating in India should follow local laws."

"But on the other hand he has asked them to evolve new guidelines and actively monitor user content which is not legally sanctioned. This makes him look two-faced," Prakash added.

Google and Facebook said earlier this month they had removed the allegedly offensive content used as evidence in the court cases.

The groups have appealed to the Delhi High Court asking for the cases against them to be quashed on the basis they cannot be held responsible for their clients' actions.

The comments of a judge hearing the case raised further fears that freedom of expression online could be restricted.

"You must have a stringent check. Otherwise, like in China, we may pass orders banning all such websites," the judge said at the January hearing.

Facebook is banned in China and Google moved its operations out of the country in 2010 in protest at censorship laws there.

The debate about social networks mirrors a larger national dialogue about freedom of speech in the world's biggest democracy following recent protests by religious groups.

Indian-origin writer Salman Rushdie was prevented from speaking at a literature festival in Jaipur last month after Muslim groups protested against his presence over his allegedly blasphemous 1988 novel "The Satanic Verses."

A group led by author and journalist Nilanjana Roy organised public readings of banned literary works on Monday to protest against what it said were recent curbs on intellectual freedom.

The initiative, called "Flashreads for free speech", was widely advertised on social networks including Twitter and Facebook.


Delhi Belly | 9 years ago | Reply

Mr Sibal. The laws of the land are still pre-dated to British Colonization and were drafted to curb freedom of speech against the then ruling party ...the Britishers. Nehru and his gene pool of heirs to Congress throne and quite many babus in India want that rule to last since it shields them from public outcry and true public opinion about their functioning. It is for the same reason that you guys are reluctant to pass Ombudsman bill ( Lokpal ) because you fear that your crimes will be exposed. Saying anything against government is punishable under act of "sedition" and India is the only country to have such a law which is very much against the spirit of Democracy. It is with great pain that Indians like me do realize that democracy in our country is coined only to benefit the influential few and has never been fixed since independence. The rein of the British colonial rulers has just passed on to new masters and we truly haven't yet received any freedom. Unless the laws are fixed to make people like you answerable for your actions in the position you hold, there will continue to be strong dissent amongst common Indian citizens. I understand the rule to mandate social sites to be religiously sensitive, but I dis agree and will never accept any law which tells me not to express my view on the officials "we chose" to "serve" us. Please remember , you are here to "serve" and not to "rule". Sooner you realize the better.

Dr Priyanka | 9 years ago | Reply

@Ambreen: Not Indian govt, your govt should keep an eye!Not that it worries us!

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ


Most Read