[Reader-list] Another report India: Govt blocks e-group

[Harsh Kapoor]

http://www.thehindu.com/2003/09/23/stories/2003092312761100.htm

The Hindu, September 23, 2003

        Bid to block anti-India website affects users

        By Sandeep Dikshit

NEW DELHI SEPT. 23. The Government's first 
attempt to block the website of an allegedly 
anti-India group has inconvenienced lakhs of 
Internet  users who are questioning the utility, 
process and procedure relating to blocking.

  While all Indian Internet Service Providers 
(ISPs) have agreed to comply with the 
Government's first-ever blocking directive taken 
under the  Information Technology Act, the 
U.S.-based host of this website — Yahoo — has 
refused. As the ISPs lack the technical finesse 
to block one

  sub-group, they have blocked all Yahoo groups or 
URLs inconveniencing the users. This website, 
belonging to a militant group espousing the cause 
of Meghalaya's Khasi tribe, can still be accessed 
by ISPs outside India or those who have not yet 
complied with the directive.

  Official sources today said that orders were 
issued by the Indian Computer Emergency Response 
Team (CERT-In) under the Department of 
Information Technology as the website "contained 
material against the Government of India and the 
State Government of Meghalaya". The absence  of 
any explicit provision in the IT Act for blocking 
of websites was because this action was seen by 
civil society as amounting to censorship, they 
explained. In this case, the blocking was to 
ensure "balanced flow of information" and not 
censorship, they added.

  The process of blocking is surrounded by several 
legal controversies, since the power to block 
itself does not exist under the IT Act. Through a 
notification in February this year, the 
Government designated CERT-In as the authority 
for blocking of websites. Another notification 
five months  later listed the officials who can 
order blocking and the grounds under which this 
can be done. "The inherent sovereign power of the 
Government to  block can hardly ever be denied. 
However, when the Government embarks upon the 
process of blocking, it is absolutely imperative 
that it must  follow those procedures and norms 
that cause least discomfort or harm to the entire 
netizen community. This appears to be the first 
case where  blocking of a particular website or 
sub-group has had the ramification of causing 
inconvenience to the netizens in the sense of 
depriving them of  access to legal groups, other 
than the blocked URL," observes cyberlaw expert, 
Pawan Duggal.

  "It is hoped that with the passage of time the 
Government does come up with appropriate norms 
and procedures that can create a smart balance 
between the requirements of the sovereign powers 
to block and the relative inconvenience, harm and 
anxiety caused to the netizen in terms of 
blocking of legitimate websites."

  Mr. Duggal says that legally speaking; there are 
a couple of grey areas. The February notification 
setting up CERT-In has been issued under  Section 
67 and Section 88. Neither Section empowers the 
Government to create such an authority. 
Therefore, the constitution of CERT-In is of no 
legal significance and may not be upheld in a 
court of law. "I am not saying that the 
Government does not have the power at all to 
block or create  CERT-In. However, surely the 
power does not lie in these provisions."

  The Government may succeed in blocking some 
websites in some cases but "the problem is that 
this provision may be misused by political powers 
in the regime to silence political dissent, 
criticism and debate. The phenomenon of mirror 
sites and emerging technologies along with 
intelligent minds  of netizens are likely to 
rensure that India's blocking adventure starts 
its march on a losing note."