Supreme Court on Freedom of Speech & Social Media
**Core Observations **
- Self-Restraint & Regulation Needed:
- Citizens must self-regulate speech on social media to prevent abuse, divisiveness, and frivolous litigation.
- State intervention is justified if self-regulation fails.
- Horizontal Application of Article 19:
- Fundamental Rights (especially Art. 19: Freedom of Speech) now apply vertically (State vs. Citizen) AND horizontally (Citizen vs. Citizen).
- Implication: Citizens can seek legal remedy against other citizens for free speech violations (e.g., hate speech, harassment). Horizontal Application of fundamental rights was recognized by the Supreme Court in Kaushal Kishor Case (2023).
Impact of Social Media on Free Speech
| Positive Impacts | Negative Impacts |
|---|---|
| Democratizes Voice: Empowers marginalized groups. | Misinformation/Fake News: Fuels panic, riots. |
| Strengthens Democracy: Enables public discourse & participation. | Hate Speech/Trolling: Harassment, mental trauma. |
| Ensures Accountability: Exposes corruption, holds authorities accountable. | Algorithmic Bias: Creates echo chambers, radicalizes opinions. |
Current Affairs Linkages
- Regulatory Frameworks: IT Rules 2021, proposed Digital India Act (replacing IT Act, 2000).
- Recent Cases: SC’s emphasis on regulating hate speech (Amish Devgan, 2020) and fake news (PILs on COVID misinformation).
- Global Context: EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA), UK’s Online Safety Bill – contrast with India’s approach.
Previous Year Questions (Prelims/Mains)
-
Mains 2022 (GS II): "How does the Indian Constitution seek to maintain a balance between individual rights and public order? Discuss with recent judicial trends."
-
Prelims 2023: Consider the following:
The Horizontal Application of Fundamental Rights implies:
(a) Only citizens can enforce FRs against the State.
(b) FRs are enforceable against private entities/citizens.
(c) FRs apply only to matters of national security.
Ans: (b)