Judiciary Must Protect Free Speech Rather Than Regulating Online Content Through New Regulatory Bodies
The Supreme Court is debating the creation of independent bodies to regulate online content, but legal experts warn this may infringe upon the separation of powers. Under Article 19(2) of the Constitution, free speech can only be restricted on specific grounds like national security or public order. The article argues that the Court lacks the technical expertise for regulation and should avoid 'judicial lawmaking.' It highlights international trends, such as the EU's Digital Services Act, and warns that excessive regulation by the judiciary could inadvertently stifle democratic dissent and transform democracies into autocracies.
Key Points
- Article 19(2) provides the only constitutional grounds for restricting free speech, and the Court cannot add new categories.
- The judiciary faces institutional barriers, including a lack of technical expertise, when attempting to regulate online media.
- Pre-censorship of media must be avoided at all costs, as established in the Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. case.
- The Kaushal Kishor (2023) judgment affirmed that additional restrictions beyond Article 19(2) cannot be imposed on free speech.
Exam Facts
- Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution
- Section 67 of the Information Technology Act
- Kaushal Kishor vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2023) case
- EU Digital Services Act 2022
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.