Media Nama: National: Friday, 03 March 2023.
Section 66A of the IT Act struck down by the SC was reintroduced in India’s submissions for a global cybercrime treaty, and was removed again. What gives?
The Indian government has declined to provide information on why it removed a controversial provision from its submissions to a United Nations committee deliberating an international cybercrime treaty last year. India had suggested criminalising online communications containing information that is "grossly offensive or has menacing character" last May. The provision was removed in a revised document submitted in August. Responding to an RTI filed by MediaNama, the Ministry of External Affairs refused to provide non-confidential documents and communications on the decision. Among other grounds cited in the reply, disclosure could harm India's security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relations with foreign States or lead to incitement of an offence. [caption id="attachment_180056" align="aligncenter" width="471"] Above purple line: India's provision on the criminalisation of offensive messages in its May submissions; Below purple line: India's provision on the criminalisation of dishonestly sent messages in its revised August submissions.[/caption] What happened?: In its submissions to the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee deliberating an international treaty on cybercrime last May, India inserted a provision that was eerily similar to Section 66A of its very own Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act). "4(d) Sending offensive messages through communication service, etc: Each State party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as are necessary to establish as an offence under its domestic law, if any person sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device: (a) Any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character;" — India's May submissions to the UN Ad Hoc Committee…
Section 66A of the IT Act struck down by the SC was reintroduced in India’s submissions for a global cybercrime treaty, and was removed again. What gives?
The Indian government has declined to provide information on why it removed a controversial provision from its submissions to a United Nations committee deliberating an international cybercrime treaty last year. India had suggested criminalising online communications containing information that is "grossly offensive or has menacing character" last May. The provision was removed in a revised document submitted in August. Responding to an RTI filed by MediaNama, the Ministry of External Affairs refused to provide non-confidential documents and communications on the decision. Among other grounds cited in the reply, disclosure could harm India's security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relations with foreign States or lead to incitement of an offence. [caption id="attachment_180056" align="aligncenter" width="471"] Above purple line: India's provision on the criminalisation of offensive messages in its May submissions; Below purple line: India's provision on the criminalisation of dishonestly sent messages in its revised August submissions.[/caption] What happened?: In its submissions to the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee deliberating an international treaty on cybercrime last May, India inserted a provision that was eerily similar to Section 66A of its very own Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act). "4(d) Sending offensive messages through communication service, etc: Each State party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as are necessary to establish as an offence under its domestic law, if any person sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device: (a) Any information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character;" — India's May submissions to the UN Ad Hoc Committee…
.JPG)
.JPG)
