SFLC.in wrote a letter to Haryana Government requesting that it reconsider the decision to shut down the internet and restore internet services as soon as possible.
SFLC.in argued that “It is to be noted that there is no existing public emergency or public safety situation. Suspending internet services for a long duration of 3 days without any incident of violence taking place and only for a protest, the call is excessive, arbitrary, and illegal.”
Read the letter here:
Date: 12/2/2024
To,
Shri Manohar Lal Khattar,
Chief Minister
Government of Haryana,
Haryana Civil Secretariat, 4th Floor,
Sector 1, Chandigarh – 160001
cmharyana@nic.in
Dear Sir,
Greetings from SFLC.in!
Subject: Suspension of Mobile Internet services in seven districts of the state of Haryana for 3 days.
This letter is with reference to the order bearing number 2/1/2024-1H(C), dated 10 February 2024, issued by the Department of Home Affairs, Government of Haryana directing suspension of “mobile internet services (2G/3G/4G/5G/CDMA/GPRS), bulk SMS (excluding banking and mobile recharge) and all dongle services etc. provided on mobile networks except voice calls in jurisdiction of districts Ambala, Kurukshetra, Kaithal, Jind, Hisar, Fatehabad and Sirsa of Haryana State” for 3 days.
It is stated in the order that the shutdown of internet is being imposed in view of the call for farmers march/agitation given by certain organisations and, there being an apprehension of causing tension, annoyance, agitation, damage of public & private property, and disturbance of peace & tranquillity in the said districts.
It is requested to the Government to reconsider its decision to impose an internet shutdown in the select districts. Such a measure is disproportionate and excessive for multiple reasons. Section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1951 requires existence of a public emergency or public safety concern. The ambit of these two terms was laid down in the case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 301. It was observed by the court that:
“Public emergency would mean the prevailing of a sudden condition or state of affairs affecting the people at large calling for immediate action. The expression “public safety” means the state or condition of freedom from danger or risk for the people at large…. Neither the occurrence of public emergency nor the interest of public safety are secretive conditions or situations. Either of the situations would be apparent to a reasonable person.”
The court further interpreted the application of section 5(2) and observed that:
“Occurrence of any public emergency” or “in the interest of public safety” are the sine qua non for the application of the provisions of Section 5(2) of the Act. Unless a public emergency has occurred or the interest of public safety demands, the authorities have no jurisdiction to exercise the powers under the said section.”
Here it is important to note that a “law and order” situation is not a situation related to “public order” or “public safety”. This distinction was laid down in the judgement of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar and Ors., (1966) 1 SCR 709 and has been followed in numerous judgments thereafter. The court observed that law and order comprehend disorders of lesser gravity when compared to public order and public order comprehends disorder of lesser gravity when compared to security of the state. It was also observed that public safety will not include a situation of law and order.
It is to be noted that there is no existing public emergency or public safety situation. Suspending internet services for a long duration of 3 days without any incident of violence taking place and only for a protest call is excessive, arbitrary, and illegal. It has also been observed by the Supreme Court of India in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India 2020 SCC OnLine SC 25 that an internet shutdown must be imposed only if it is unavoidable and necessary.
Moreover, the Government has also imposed section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which to curb the law-and-order situation. In the light of this, suspension of Internet services is not only disproportionate but also a harsh measure. While a physical curfew is in place people heavily rely on internet for essential services like online transactions, healthcare services and education. Internet is also an important source of information during tense times like these.
The sudden internet shutdown has also resulted in cancelation of several exams which has left the students
stranded and in a disproportionate position over the rest of the students. This suspension of Internet services across the seven districts is bound to impact livelihood, education, and health care for lakhs of people in the State as 96 percent of the population in India depends on mobile internet services.
For the above reasons it is requested to the government to reconsider the decision to impose the internet shutdown and to restore internet services on an urgent basis. SFLC.IN is a donor supported legal services organization that brings together lawyers, policy analysts, students, and technologists to protect freedom in the digital world. SFLC.IN promotes innovation and open access to knowledge by helping developers make great Free and Open-Source Software, protect privacy and civil liberties for citizens in the digital world by educating and providing free legal advice and help policy makers make informed and just decisions with the use and adoption of technology.
Sincerely,
Prasanth Sugathan
Legal Director
SFLC.IN
prasanth@sflc.in
