Like bulldozer justice, Internet shutdowns are disproportionate and must be banished: Shyam Divan

Bengaluru: It is time courts recognised how completely out of step we are with the rest of the democratic world when it comes to internet shutdowns, senior advocate Shyam Divan said on Friday.

He was delivering the SG Sundaraswamy Memorial Centenary Lecture on 'Challenges in Protection of Human Rights in the Digital World'.

Former Supreme Court judge AS Bopanna, Karnataka High Court judge Justice Anu Sivaraman and senior advocate BV Acharya were also present there.

Divan said that despite the Supreme Court decision in 2020, internet shutdowns were rampant and excessive. According to him, India witnessed the highest number of internet shutdowns in the world in 2023, the record it held for the sixth straight year. The internet was snapped 116 times in 2023, especially in Manipur, he added.

"It is time our courts recognize how completely out of step we are with the rest of the democratic world when it comes to internet shutdowns. Just as bulldozer law enforcement is grossly disproportionate and ought to be banished, so to internet shutdowns," he said, adding that it is impossible to operate or survive the oxygen of the internet.

Divan highlighted several other principles laid out by the Supreme Court appropriate for the digital age. Explaining one such principle, he said national security cannot be a bugbear that the judiciary shies away from on mere mentioning.

"This principle was laid down by the Supreme Court in an important interlocutory order passed in the Pegasus spyware case, which is still pending before the court. It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court, despite the importance of the case and despite the court itself having appointed a committee with Justice R V Ravindran as an overseeing judge, has not thought it appropriate to list the case for final hearing, two years after having received the expert report. This neglect in taking up the case expeditiously reflects poorly on all of us who are part of the system; the bar, the bench and the court registry," he said.

Divan cited another emerging principle which is still being heard in an ongoing contest before the Bombay High Court, in which a split verdict was delivered on the question whether the government can establish a fact check unit. "Instead of Abraham Lincoln's of the people, by the people, for the people, we may have a fact check unit of the government, by the government, for the government," he said.