Bombay High Court Verdict on Constitutionality of Fact-Checking Unit

Source: This post on the Bombay High Court Verdict on Constitutionality of Fact-Checking Units has been created based on the article “Judicial clarity on free speech” published in “The Hindu” on 21^st February 2024.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 Indian Polity – Indian Constitution— features, significant provisions.

News: The article discusses the verdict of Justice Gautam Patel of the Bombay High Court in the Kunal Kamra case regarding the constitutionality of Fact-Checking Units of the government.

Recently, Justice Gautam Patel of the Bombay High Court, in the Kunal Kamra case, affirmed the constitutional guarantee of free speech.

What is the Kunal Kamra case?

The context of the decision is the amendment of the IT Rules 2021 which confers powers on the Fact Check Unit (FCU) to control the digital content in matters connected with the business of the Central government.

Read more about it here.

What was the verdict of Justice Gautam Patel?

Declaring the amended Rule unconstitutional, Justice Patel held that:

1. The amendment results in a form of censorship of user content that is vague and overbroad. It destroys the right to criticise and debate.
2. No reasonable standards and objective criteria to determine the validity of the decisions of the FCU as the sole decision maker.
3. The amendment is not within the boundaries of reasonable restrictions envisaged in Article 19 (2), (6).
4. The amendment violates the rule of non-arbitrariness and non-discrimination in Article 14.
5. Violates the doctrine of proportionality, the Judge held the amended Rule as ultra vires Article 19(1)(a), 19(2), 19 (1) (g), 19 (6), Article 14 and Section 79 of the IT Act.
6. The need for regulation of digital platforms for combatting misinformation, which are a threat to the reputation and dignity of individuals, was also acknowledged.

What is the significance of the decision?

Protecting Democratic Principles: The decision emphasized the importance of dissent and disagreement in a democracy. It upholds the right of free speech as a necessary condition of freedom.

Validates the Logic of Judicial Review: The decision validated the role of judicial review as a check against governmental overreach of power.

Question for practice:

What are the concerns regarding the constitutionality of Fact-Checking Units of the government?