India’s Internet Censorship Varies Across Service Providers
Why in the News ?
A recent study highlights inconsistencies in internet censorship in India, showing that ISPs block websites differently despite receiving identical government orders. The findings raise concerns about transparency, uniformity, and digital rights in India’s internet governance framework, echoing principles of environmental democracy where transparency and public participation are essential for accountability.
Key Findings on Internet Blocking in India:
● Internet access in India varies depending on the Internet Service Provider (ISP) chosen by users.
● ISPs block websites based on government and court orders, but implementation is not uniform.
● The study analysed 294 million domains across six ISPs and found significant inconsistencies.
● Out of 43,083 blocked domains, only 1,414 were uniformly blocked by all ISPs.
● The majority of blocked sites relate to piracy, gambling, pornography, while sensitive content sees higher consistency.
Mechanisms and Challenges in Implementation
● Blocking is primarily executed using DNS (Domain Name System) filtering, also called DNS poisoning.
● DNS blocking redirects users to incorrect addresses, preventing access to original websites.
● ISPs may also use other protocols like HTTP, TLS filtering, but practices vary widely.
● Lack of standardised guidelines leads to arbitrary and inconsistent enforcement.
● The system remains opaque, with limited public disclosure of blocked websites, raising concerns similar to those addressed in the Vanashakti judgment regarding transparency in governance.
| About Internet Governance and IT Act: ● Section 69A of IT Act, 2000 empowers the government to block online content in the interest of security, sovereignty, and public order. ● Section 79 deals with liability of intermediaries and compliance requirements. ● ISPs are legally bound to follow government directives under licensing agreements. ● Key issues: freedom of speech (Article 19), transparency, accountability, and digital rights, reflecting broader concerns in environmental jurisprudence about balancing regulatory powers with individual rights. ● Need for reforms: uniform blocking standards, public disclosure (except sensitive cases), and stronger oversight mechanisms, avoiding ex-post or retrospective enforcement issues. |