Section 114A of the Evidence Act disproportionately burdens average individuals who, if wrongfully accused of publishing illicit content online, may not possess the resources to prove their innocence in court.
Those brought to court under Section 114A must have, in addition to adequate legal representation, more than a basic understanding of how the Internet operates to prove that they did not publish illicit content.
Knowledge of IP addresses, servers, and complex networks is necessary to provide evidence of one’s innocence in cases covered by Section 114A. This information, however, is not known by, or available to, average Internet users. Section 114A, therefore, burdens innocent individuals presumed guilty on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
Section 114A also threatens the individual right to freedom of expression. Internet users may undertake measures to avoid false accusations of their guilt. A blogger, for example, may unduly censor any comments made by readers that could be considered defamatory, seditious, or libelous. This would defeat the participatory purpose of blogs, which provide a platform for the open dialogue among individuals.
As a result, Section 114A inadvertently stifles public discussion about pertinent political or social issues and protects public authorities, such as the State, from public scrutiny.
No comments:
Post a Comment