The suspension of internet services in India has become a recurring issue, often imposed under the guise of maintaining public order and security. The legal framework governing internet shutdowns, originally established under the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017 [1] and now governed by the Temporary Suspension of Telecommunication Services Rules, 2024[2] (2024 Rules), which came into force on November 22nd, 2024 under the Telecommunication Act, 2023, sets out specific criteria that must be met before such extreme measures can be taken. However, an analysis of recent internet shutdown orders indicates that authorities are frequently exceeding their vested powers, issuing blanket suspensions that do not adhere to the legal requirements of necessity, proportionality, and reasoned justification.
The Legal Framework: Conditions for Internet Shutdowns
An internet shutdown can be imposed by the Central Government, State Government, or an officer specially authorised by either, under specific conditions. These include the occurrence of any public emergency or considerations related to public safety. Additionally, shutdowns may be enacted if deemed necessary or expedient in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, defence and security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, or for preventing incitement to the commission of any offence.
Any such shutdown order must adhere to the prescribed procedures and safeguards, be issued in writing with clearly recorded reasons, and specify the duration and manner of enforcement. Additionally, the order must include essential details such as the date, time, and the specific area affected by the suspension. The governing provisions, as outlined in the Telecommunications Act, 2023, aim to ensure that such orders are not imposed arbitrarily. However, despite these legal requirements, many government-imposed internet shutdowns continue to fall short of the prescribed standards.
Failure to Meet Legal Requirements
An examination of shutdown orders issued in various states highlights a disturbing pattern of non-compliance with legal mandates. For instance, two internet shutdown orders issued in Manipur on 08/11/2023 and 23/11/2023 relied on a generic justification, stating:
“There is apprehension that some anti-social elements might use social media extensively for transmission of images, hate speech, and hate video messages inciting the passions of the public which might have serious repercussions for the law and order situation in the State of Manipur.”
Out of the numerous internet shutdown orders issued, only a limited number have been made public—many of them disclosed solely due to our applications filed under the RTI Act. These publicly available orders, like many others issued across states such as Jammu & Kashmir, Haryana, Rajasthan, Punjab, and Odisha, lack specific reasoning or supporting evidence to justify the necessity of an internet shutdown. Instead, they are often based on vague apprehensions, falling short of the high threshold established by law and reiterated by judicial precedent.
Furthermore, data recorded by SFLC.in indicates that almost all states mentioned above have been following a similar trend—issuing shutdown orders based on generic statements without substantive justification. This practice raises serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and the potential for misuse.
Overreach of Powers: The Case of Bihar
An analysis of Internet Shutdown orders from the State of Bihar shows an even more concerning pattern. Apart from the deficiencies mentioned above, the shutdown order dated 27/03/2023, among a number of other such orders, exceeds the powers granted under the 2024 Rules by not only suspending internet services but also blocking websites and mobile applications. More alarmingly, these orders lack proper application of mind, as they block applications such as Google+, Viber, and WeChat—platforms that are no longer in existence in India.
Apart from showing non-compliance with statutory rules, such actions not only exceed the permissible scope of shutdown orders but also demonstrate a clear disregard for the principles of necessity and proportionality. The blocking of outdated or non-operational applications illustrates the arbitrary nature of these orders, raising critical questions about whether they are issued with due diligence or merely as a routine administrative exercise without meaningful scrutiny.
Implications for Fundamental Rights
The absence of a clear, specific, and legally sound justification in these orders directly undermines the principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, which includes the right to access information. Any restriction on this fundamental right must be reasonable, necessary, and proportionate, as established by the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 25. The Court emphasized that:
“Suspension of internet services indefinitely is impermissible. The restrictions must be necessary and proportionate.”
The continued issuance of vague and arbitrary shutdown orders directly contradicts this judicial directive. By imposing such restrictions without adequate reasoning, authorities are violating constitutional rights and setting a dangerous precedent for the unchecked use of executive power.
The Way Forward
To curb the misuse of internet shutdown powers, the following steps must be taken:
- Strict Adherence to Legal Requirements: Authorities must ensure that all internet shutdown orders meet the criteria laid down in the Rules and are supported by specific, documented reasons. Further, it must be ensured that the internet shutdowns are imposed strictly as per the conditions detailed in the Shutdown Order.
- Judicial and Administrative Oversight: Independent review mechanisms should be established to scrutinize shutdown orders before they are enforced, ensuring compliance with constitutional principles and measures must be set in place against the District Administrators that do not comply with the newly prescribed rules.
- Transparency and Accountability: The government must make all shutdown orders publicly accessible, preferably on the Home Department website of each state, providing clear explanations for the suspension of services in regional language.
- Periodic Review of Shutdown Orders: Orders must be time-bound and reviewed periodically to prevent unnecessary extensions.
Conclusion
The increasing misuse of internet shutdown powers, as evidenced by the arbitrary orders issued across multiple states, highlights the urgent need for stricter enforcement of legal safeguards. The law mandates that internet suspensions must be reasoned, proportionate, and used only as a last resort. However, the prevailing practice of issuing vague and sweeping shutdown orders not only violates constitutional rights but also sets a dangerous precedent for executive overreach. Unless corrective measures are implemented, the erosion of fundamental freedoms will continue, undermining the very principles of democracy and the rule of law in India.
References:
1. Vide G.S.R. 998(E), dated 7th August 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extra., Pt. II, Sec. 3(i), No. 679, dated 8th August, 2017.
2. Vide G.S.R. 724(E), dated 22nd November 2024, published in the Gazette of India, Extra., Pt. II, Sec. 3(i), No. 665, dated 22nd November, 2024.
