Supreme Court's Call for Social Media Regulations

The Supreme Court of India has highlighted the need for guidelines to regulate social media, particularly focusing on influencers who commercialize free speech that could potentially offend vulnerable groups. This initiative stems from a case involving comedians accused of making derogatory comments about individuals with Spinal Muscular Atrophy.

Need for Guidelines

• The court has directed the Union government to draft regulations in consultation with the National Broadcasters and Digital Association.
• The necessity for new guidelines was questioned, with some arguing that existing legal mechanisms, such as those under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Information Technology Act, 2000, are adequate.

Protection of Individual Dignity

• Article 19(2) of the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on free speech, but does not explicitly include individual dignity.
• There are concerns about extending restrictions based on the somewhat amorphous concept of dignity, which could lead to expansive censorship.

Regulations and Free Speech

• Both Apar Gupta and Jay Vinayak Ojha express concerns that new regulations could suppress artistic expressions like comedy and satire.
• The Supreme Court has historically protected speech that might be offensive or disturbing, emphasizing the importance of free expression.

Commercial Speech

• Commercial speech, though driven by profit, falls under the purview of Article 19(1)(a) and is constitutionally protected.
• Examples include the Sakal Papers case, which affirmed the right to publish as many pages as desired, and the Tata Press case, which supported the dissemination of commercial information.

Inconsistent Precedents

• The court's polyvocality, or divergent views, can lead to inconsistent precedents, though this does not diminish its status as a court of record.
• Concerns have been raised regarding the court's directive to the executive to frame regulations, which complicates future constitutional challenges.

Safeguards Against Misuse

• Regulations should include strong review mechanisms and respect for free speech values.
• Stakeholder consultation should be meaningful and inclusive, extending beyond groups favoring restrictions.
• Current practices under the IT Act, such as the lack of transparency in takedown orders, should be addressed.

Experts like Apar Gupta, the founder-director of the Internet Freedom Foundation, and Jay Vinayak Ojha, a senior fellow at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, contribute to this ongoing dialogue regarding the balance between regulation and free speech.