Editorial: Pitting citizen against citizen
Recruiting citizen volunteers to patrol cyber world violates democratic principles
The Union Home Ministry’s plan to recruit citizen volunteers to patrol the cyber world to keep an eye on anti-national content is a bad idea. It violates democratic principles and is fraught with dangerous consequences of creating unhinged vigilantism. Though the initial plan is to create such volunteer corps in Jammu & Kashmir and Tripura to flag anti-national posts on social media platforms, the experiment could be eventually extended to other States, leading to more curbs on the freedom of expression, legitimising vigilantism and creating more divisions in an already polarised society. The controversial move comes nearly three years after the Ministry of Home Affairs, on the directions of the Supreme Court, launched a cybercrime portal for identifying content related only to child pornography and cases of sexual harassment against women and children on online platforms. But, extending the scope to cover radicalisation and anti-national activities amounts to executive overreach. There is no prior verification required for citizens to register as volunteers on the proposed national cybercrime reporting portal. The move appears to serve as an extra set of eyes and ears in the virtual world for the police force, but it is fraught with serious social and legal ramifications. In the aftermath of 9/11 terror attacks in the United States, many countries started police volunteers programmes designed to involve ordinary citizens in patrolling neighbourhoods and shopping centres, collecting evidence as well as checking on migrants.
The main problem with such a plan is that the existing legal framework does not define what constitutes anti-national activity. As a result, it leads to arbitrary interpretation to suit the political dispensation of the day. Moreover, there is no statutory backing for such a volunteer force. Entrusting ordinary citizens with responsibilities that normally fall under the purview of law and order personnel would amount to inviting trouble as it could lead to widespread misuse. Pitting one citizen against the other, without any accountability, will create a situation where polarisation and mistrust will only widen. The unofficial surveillance constitutes a clear violation of fundamental rights to freedom of speech and privacy and ignores the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. While striking down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the court had ruled that a distinction must be made between speech that is simply offensive or annoying and that which is guilty of inciting a disruption of public order, or violence. At a time when vigilantes are on the prowl on social media platforms, desperate to dictate the narratives, such a move to outsource the state duties to a ragtag group of individuals could prove disastrous. Already, several State governments are seeking to impose blanket gag orders on online criticism.
Now you can get handpicked stories from Telangana Today on Telegram everyday. Click the link to subscribe.
Click to follow Telangana Today Facebook page and Twitter .
