Centre for Internet and Society

Government Policy and Guidelines

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:27:26Z

In this unit Snehashish dwells upon the four main policy guidelines that were formulated by the Government of India.

The above were the four main telecom policies formulated by the government.

One of the main functions of DoT is to issue guidelines with respect to issuing of licence, allocation of spectrum, interconnection, etc. These guidelines operate as additional conditions, laid down by DoT with respect to conduct and functioning of telecom operators. For example, the DoT issued guideline for radiation standards in respect of electromagnetic radiations (EMR) for mobile towers, which came into effect on September 1, 2012.

The DoT has issued numerous guidelines across the years. However, it is important to discuss the DoT guidelines with respect to issuance of telecom service licences.

Basic Telephone Services Licences (BTS)
Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Licence (CMTS)
Unified Access Service Licence (UASL)
National Long Distance (NLD) and
International Long Distance Licence (ILD)

Guidelines on issuing of Basic Telephone Services

DoT issued guideline for issuing of BTS licences in January, 2001. The key features of the guidelines are:

The applicant must be an Indian company. There was no restriction on the number of BTS licensees in a circle. The applicants were also required to have a minimum amount of paid up equity capital. This varied from circle to circle. There was a cap of 49 per cent foreign equity on companies applying for the BTS licence
BTS licences were issued for a period of 20 years on a non-exclusive basis
The licences had to pay an entry fee before the grant of the licence. Consequently, the basic telecom service operators had to pay an annual licence fee based on their annual gross revenue
The basic telecom service operators also had to submit two bank guarantee as an assurance to meet the contractual and roll out obligation under the BTS licence
The Guideline also laid down that the license holders can also provide limited mobility services, by using the spectrum allocated to them for last mile delivery. However, service operators provided limited mobility services had to pay additional 2 per cent fee.
The Guidelines declared that a CMTS licensee can also provide fixed services using GSM networks within their service area. *This was done to satisfy cellular operators who were protesting against permission given to the basic telephone operators to provide limited mobility services.
The basic operators could carry intra-circle long distance traffic. However, the operators had to provide the subscribers, the option to choose their own long distance carriers. For this purpose, BTS licensee could enter into an arrangement with the national long distance licensee.
Basic operators were required to make their own arrangements for the installation of infrastructure, network equipment and, right of way. They were also allowed to enter into agreements related to interconnection with other licensee in other service areas. The terms and conditions of such interconnectivity agreement were subject to TRAI regulations and directions.

Guidelines on issuing of Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Licences

The DoT issued Guidelines for CMTS licences along with guidelines for the issuing of the basic telecom licences. These two sets of guidelines are generally similar to each other but they vary in certain issues.

In the light of the criticism of the previous licensing policy, the DoT guidelines on issuing CMTS licence proposed “informed ascending bidding process”[1] for auctioning of CMTS licence.
The CMTS licence was issued for a period of 20 years on a non-exclusive basis, extendable by 10 years.
The licensee can transfer; assign the licence only with the permission of the DoT, the licensor.
The prospective cellular operator had to submit roll-out plans and financial arrangements with the application.
The licence period was set at 20 years, extendable by another 10 years.
The winning bidder had to pay an entry fee. They also had to pay an annual fee which is a percentage of the annual gross revenue.
The cellular operator also had to pay an additional sum for spectrum.
The cellular operator, were given freedom to use any kind of network equipment as long as they satisfied certain international and domestic standards.
The cellular operators were allowed to enter into any interconnection arrangements subject to TRAI regulations.
The guideline also laid down that cellular operators will fully co-operate with law enforcement and government agencies in providing access to their infrastructure.
The licensees have to make their own arrangement for installing infrastructure and equipment and for right of way.

Guidelines for issuing Unified Access Service Licences

The UASL Guidelines were issued in November, 2003. They were consistent with the TRAI recommendations. Option was given to the existing licensees to continue under their basic telecom and cellular mobile telecom licences or migrate to the new unified access service licence regime. The main highlights of the Guidelines on issuing of UASL were:

Cellular licensees can offer limited mobility service within their short distance coverage areas.
Basic telecom service operators had to pay an entry fee for the UASL which was equal to the entry fee paid by the fourth cellular operator for the specific service area or the entry fee paid by the basic telecom provider in that circle, whichever is higher.
No additional entry fee had to be paid by the cellular mobile service providers.
The basic telecom service operator, who choose not to completely migrate to full mobility regime may pay additional licence fee for providing services in wireless in local loop (WLL). However, such service will be restricted to the short distance charging areas.
There was no additional spectrum allotted to the licensee for migrating to the UASL regime.
The unified access service providers can use any technology without any restrictions.

Additional Entry fee to be paid by the existing Basic Service Operators for migration to Unified Access Service License[2]

S.No.	Name of the operator	Service Area of the basic service operator (BSO)	Date of signing of licence agreements	Entry fee paid by BSO (in crores)	Entry fee paid by 4^th cellular operator(in crores)	Additional entry fee to be paid for migration to UASL(in crores)
1.	Reliance Infocomm Ltd.	Rajasthan	20.7.2001	20	32.25	12.25
		UP(East)	20.7.2001	15	45.25	30.25
		Maharashtra	20.7.2001		189+203.66*
				115	392.66	277.66
		Karnataka	20.7.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Punjab	20.7.2001	20	151.75	131.75
		Andhra Pradesh	20.7.2001	35	103.01	68.01
		Haryana	20.7.2001	10	21.46	11.46
		Kerala	20.7.2001	20	40.54	20.54
		Uttar Pradesh (West)	20.7.2001	15	30.55	15.55
		West Bengal	20.7.2001		0+78.01*
				25	78.01	53.01
		Madhya Pradesh	20.7.2001	20	17.4501	0
		Bihar	20.7.2001	10
		Himachal Pradesh	20.7.2001	2	1.1	0
		Orissa	20.7.2001	5
		Tamil Nadu	26.9.2001		79+154*
				50	233	183
		Delhi	20.7.2001	50	170.7	120.7
		Andaman & Nicobar **	20.7.2001	1		0
2.	RTL	Gujarat	18.3.1997	179.0859030	109.01	0
3.	Tata Teleservices Ltd.	Gujarat	31.8.2001	40	109.01	69.01
		Karnataka	31.8.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Andhra Pradesh	4.11.1997	161.47(old)	103.01	0
		Tamil Nadu	31.8.2001		79+154*
				50	233	183
		Delhi	31.8.2001	50	170.7	120.7
4.	TTL (Mah.) Ltd.	Maharashtra	31.8.2001		189+203.66*	-
5.	Bharti Telenet Ltd.	Karnataka	29.10.2001	35	206.83	171.83
		Madhya Pradesh	28.2.1997	35.33 (old)	17.4501	0
		Tamil Nadu	29.10.2001	50	79+154*
					233	183
		Delhi	29.10.2001	50	170.7	120.7
6.	Shyam Telelink	Rajasthan	4.3.1998	29.29(old)	32.25	2.96
7.	HFCL Infotel Ltd.	Punjab	7.11.1997	177.59(old)	151.75	0

Guidelines on issuing of National Long Distance (NLD) Services Licence

The DoT issued guidelines for NLD operations along with the licences. The main aspects of the Guidelines are:

Unlimited entry for carrying inter-circle and intra-circle calls
Total foreign equity of the operator should not exceed 74 per cent.
Private operators had to enter into an agreement with fixed service providers with in a circle for traffic between long distance and short distance charging centres
A timeframe of seven years was set for rolling out services. This timeframe was divided into four phases. If in any of the phases the operator failed to achieve its network coverage target then it would result in encashment and forfeiture of the bank guarantee of that phase
Private operators had to pay an entry fee of 25 million and a financial bank guarantee of Rs. 200 million.
Under the revenue sharing agreement, the DoT would charge maximum 6 per cent revenue generated by the private operator.
Private operators were allowed to set up landing facilities for accessing submarine cables and make use of available excess bandwidth.

Guidelines on issuing of International Long Distance (ILD) Services licences

The DoT issued new guidelines for ILD licences in December, 2005. This was done to implement licence simplification measures and also to allow higher foreign investment. The key features of the Guidelines were:

The ILD service, under the Guidelines was defined as network carriage or bearer service which allows NLD licensees international connectivity to foreign networks
The ILD service provider was allowed to provide all kinds of bearer services from an integrated platform. However, a separate licence was required for satellite and global mobile personal communication services.
The terms for the license: (i) the applicant must be an Indian company; (ii) the company must have net-worth and paid up capital of 2.5 crores; (ii) the total foreign equity should not exceed 74 per cent
The ILD licence was issued for a period of 20 year on a non-exclusive basis, and it would be automatically renewed for another term of five year subject to satisfactory performance.
The entry fee for the ILD licence was Rs. 2.5 crores and an unconditional bank guarantee of the same amount has to be submitted, which could be forfeited subject to failure in fulfilling the roll out obligations. The licensee had to also submit an additional financial bank guarantee of Rs. 20 crores. The ILD operators also had to pay a 6 per cent of the annual adjusted gross revenue as annual licence fee. The Guideline also laid down that an additional fee will be charged for the universal service obligation and use of spectrum
The ILD operator has to submit to the DoT detailed plan of the rollout obligation and also commission at least one gateway switch in order to interconnect with NLD licensees. Such networks must be in conformity with the international and national standards.
For provide ILD services, the operator may obtain leased lines from other access providers.
The ILD operators can provide lower-than-toll quality service, provided that there is no degradation in the quality of services.
The gateway and landing stations may be established. However, this will be subject to security and monitoring requirements.
The ILD operator had to furnish detailed accounts periodically and furnish any such information requested by TRAI.
An ILD operator, must co-operate provide facilities to law enforcement and government agencies for monitoring and surveillance. However, the licensee must also ensure protection of privacy of communication.

[1]. The auction process consisted of three rounds of bidding. A minimum bid price was prescribed for each round. The highest bid in the first round was declared the minimum reserve price in the second round. Subsequently the highest bid in the second round was set as the reserve price in the third round. The lowest bidders in each round were rejected to participate in the next round of bidding.

[2]. Annexure 1, Guidelines for Unified Access (Basic and Cellular) Service Licence, November 11, 2003 available at www.dot.gov.in/uas/Guidelines-Unified_License111103.doc

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/govt-policy-and-guidelines

Government of India's Response to WGEC Questionnaire

snehashish — 2014-01-22T16:55:43Z

The Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation circulated a questionnaire to collect the views and positions of the stakeholders on the various aspects of enhanced cooperation. India's response to the questionnaire is documented below for archival purposes.

INDIA, Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations Office
9, RUE DU VALAIS, 1202, GENEVA
Mission.india@ties.itu.int

1. Which stakeholder category do you belong to?
Government
If non-government, please indicate:
If non-government, please indicate if you are:

2. What do you think is the significance, purpose and scope of enhanced cooperation as per the Tunis Agenda? 1) Significance 2) Purpose 3) Scope

Significance
The World Summit on Information Society (WSIS), held in two phases had discussed the issues relating to Internet Governance at a great length and in detail and recommended (i) convening a new forum for multi-stake holder policy dialogue and (ii) beginning the process towards Enhanced Cooperation. As a result of the first recommendation, an Internet Governance Forum was established in 2006 as a forum for dialogue among various stakeholders. However, the process towards Enhanced Cooperation to develop international public policy issues pertaining to Internet in a fair and equitable manner is yet to take off. The use of internet and its socio-economic impact has grown further in the last few years. This has made the need for Enhanced Cooperation even more significant and urgent.
Purpose
The purpose of Enhanced Cooperation is to enable governments, on an equal footing, through a suitable multilateral, transparent and democratic mechanism, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, in consultation with all other stakeholders.
Scope
The scope of Enhanced Cooperation covers international public policy issues pertaining to the internet as well as the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues pertaining to the coordination and management of critical internet resources, but not the dayto-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.

3. To what extent has or has not enhanced cooperation been implemented? Please use the space below to explain and to provide examples to support your answer.

Enhanced Cooperation, as envisaged in Paras 68 and 69 of the Tunis Agenda, has not been realized. This remains a major shortcoming in implementation of WSIS Outcomes related to Enhanced Cooperation, considering that a specific mandate was given by the World Summit for Information Society (WSIS) in 2005 to begin such a process of Enhanced Cooperation in the first quarter of 2006. There is no multilateral, transparent and democratic global platform where governments can, on an equal footing, decide the full range of international public policies related to internet, in a holistic manner. There is also no mechanism for the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues including those pertaining to coordination and management of critical Internet resources. Not establishing an Enhanced Cooperation process has denied the Governments an opportunity to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public-policy issues pertaining to the internet.

4. What are the relevant international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet?
The Working Group on Internet Governance set up by WSIS identified many public policy issues pertaining to internet, which continue to be relevant today, as listed below:

Issues relating to infrastructure and the management of critical Internet resources, including administration of the domain name system and Internet protocol addresses (IP addresses), administration of the root server system, technical standards, peering and interconnection, telecommunications infrastructure, including innovative and convergent technologies, as well as multilingualization;
Issues relating to the use of the Internet, including spam, network security and cybercrime;
Issues that are relevant to the Internet but have an impact much wider than the Internet and for which existing organizations are responsible, such as intellectual property rights (IPRs) or international trade;
Issues relating to the developmental aspects of Internet governance, in particular capacity building in developing countries;
Issues relating to interconnection costs, meaningful participation in global policy development, freedom of expression, Data protection and privacy rights, Consumer rights, convergence and “next generation networks” (NGNs), as well as trade and e-commerce; Furthermore, Para 59 of the Tunis Agenda recognised that Internet Governance includes social, economic and technical issues including affordability, reliability and quality of service and para 60 of the Tunis Agenda recognised that there are many cross-cutting public policy issues that require attention. Since WSIS, international internet-related public policy issues have only grown in their number as well as importance. Several issues such as cloud computing have emerged in the last few years. Newer issues will keep arising with significant international public policy dimensions as the Internet continues to evolve and grow in its reach and spread.

5. What are the roles and responsibilities of the different stakeholders, including governments, in implementation of the various aspects of enhanced cooperation?

Enhanced Cooperation is a dynamic process due to the dynamic nature of internet. As a result, the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders would need to be broadly defined. In this regard, we concur with the recommendations of the Working Group on Internet Governance on the role of different stakeholders — as listed below: Governments: Public authority for Internet related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States and that they have rights and responsibilities for international Internet public policy.

Their roles and responsibilities include:-

Public policy-making and coordination and implementation, as appropriate, at the national level, and policy development and coordination at the regional and international levels;
Creating an enabling environment for information and communication technology (ICT) development; Oversight functions; Development and adoption of laws, regulations and standards;
Treaty-making; Development of best practices; Fostering capacity-building in and through ICTs;
Promoting research and development of technologies and standards;
Promoting access to ICT services; Combating cybercrime;
Fostering international and regional cooperation;
Promoting the development of infrastructure and ICT applications;
Addressing general developmental issues;
Promoting multilingualism and cultural diversity;

Dispute resolution and arbitration.

Private sector: The private sector has important role and responsibilities which include the following:-
Industry self-regulation; Development of best practices; Development of policy proposals, guidelines and tools for policymakers and other stakeholders; Research and development of technologies, standards and processes; Contribution to the drafting of national law and participation in national and international policy development; Fostering innovation; Arbitration and dispute resolution; Promoting capacity-building.

Civil society: Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters especially at the community level and should continue to play such roles. The roles and responsibilities of civil society include:

Awareness-raising and capacity-building (knowledge, training, skills sharing);
Promoting various public interest objectives; Facilitating network-building; Mobilizing citizens in democratic processes;
Bringing perspectives of marginalized groups, including, for example, excluded communities and grass-roots activists;
Engaging in policy processes; Contributing expertise, skills, experience and knowledge in a range of ICT policy areas;
Contributing to policy processes and policies that are more bottom-up, people-centred and inclusive; Research and development of technologies and standards; Development and dissemination of best practices;
Helping to ensure that political and market forces are accountable to the needs of all members of society;
Encouraging social responsibility and good governance practice. Advocating for the development of social projects and activities that are critical but may not be “fashionable” or profitable;
Contributing to shaping visions of human-centred information societies based on human rights, sustainable development, social justice and empowerment.

Furthermore, the contribution to the Internet of the academic community is very valuable and constitutes one of its main sources of inspiration, innovation and creativity. Similarly, the technical community and its organizations are deeply involved in Internet operation, Internet standard-setting and Internet services development. Both of these groups make a permanent and valuable contribution to the stability, security, functioning and evolution of the Internet. They interact extensively with and within all stakeholder groups. The para 35 of the Tunis Agenda recognises the role of intergovernmental organizations in facilitating the coordination of internet related public policy issues and international organizations in the development of internet related technical standards and relevant policies.

6. How should enhanced cooperation be implemented to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet?

A suitable multilateral, transparent and democratic mechanism must be created where governments, on an equal footing, may carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet and public policy issues pertaining to coordination and management of critical Internet resources, in consultation with all other stakeholders. India would submit its recommendations on such a mechanism separately to the WGEC.
WGEC should submit its recommendation on the broad parameters of such a mechanism to the UNGA through CSTD as an input to the overall review of the outcomes of the WSIS.

7. How can enhanced cooperation enable other stakeholders to carry out their roles and responsibilities?

The mechanism should be designed so as to enable the other stakeholders to discharge their respective roles and responsibilities as mentioned above in response to Question 5 above in an effective manner. Further, Para 70 of the Tunis Agenda stated that relevant international organizations responsible for essential tasks associated with the Internet should contribute in creating an environment that facilitates the development of public policy principles. Therefore these organizations would need to make necessary changes to facilitate an appropriate interface with the mechanism of Enhanced Cooperation.

8. What are the most appropriate mechanisms to fully implement enhanced cooperation as recognized in the Tunis Agenda, including on international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet and public policy issues associated with coordination and management of critical Internet resources?

It is relevant to recall relevant paragraphs of the Tunis Agenda to identify most appropriate mechanisms to fully implement enhanced cooperation. The Para 69 sets the tone for Governments to define a mechanism of the enhanced cooperation. This paragraph together with other paras in the Tunis Agenda, when read with the WSIS outcomes clearly provides the basis for establishing the mechanism of enhanced cooperation. The sequence of paragraphs that help define the contours of a mechanism is as follows:

Para 29 states that international management of internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic with the full involvement of governments and other stakeholders.
Para 31 commits to full participation of all stakeholders, within respective roles and responsibilities, to ensure requisite legitimacy of governance of internet.
The roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders have been defined in brief in para 35 of the Tunis Agenda and in detail in paras 29-34 of WGIG report.
In Para 60 of the Tunis Agenda, the Leaders have clearly pointed out the inadequacy of the current mechanisms for dealing with many cross-cutting international public policy issues. As a sequel to this recognition, Para 61 stresses the need to initiate, and reinforce, as appropriate, a transparent, democratic, and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations, in their respective roles.
Para 68 further recognizes the need for development of public policy by governments in consultation with all stakeholders. The Para 69 recognises the importance of the governments to act on an equal footing with each other. Thus, there is a clear mandate for defining a mechanism for effective and enhanced cooperation on global internet governance. India would submit its recommendations on such a mechanism separately to the WGEC.

9. What is the possible relationship between enhanced cooperation and the IGF?

The IGF is a forum for multi-stakeholder dialogue. The discussions and dialogue in IGF would enrich the process of development of the international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet by the mechanism proposed under Enhanced Cooperation. Enhanced Cooperation is a mechanism for policy development whereas IGF is a forum for policy dialogue - IGF is, thus, a distinct and a complementary process to the enhanced cooperation mechanism. IGF should contribute its outcomes as inputs into the policy development/ making processes to be undertaken by the new mechanism for Enhanced Cooperation.

10. How can the role of developing countries be made more effective in global Internet governance?

Paragraph 65 of the Tunis Agenda underlines the need to maximize the participation of developing countries in decisions regarding Internet governance, which should reflect their interests, as well as in the development of capacity building. The developing countries are integral part of the global Internet governance. They would participate, at equal footing in the mechanism explained above.

11. What barriers remain for all stakeholders to fully participate in their respective roles in global Internet governance? How can these barriers best be overcome?

The main barrier to the participation of stakeholders is the absence of a mechanism for global internet governance where they can participate in their respective roles. Second barrier to participation of stakeholders is the nature of selection process of participants who represent these stakeholders. The process of selection of the representatives should be made in a transparent manner and using an inclusive approach.
12. What actions are needed to promote effective participation of all marginalised people in the global information society?

The mechanism proposed above involves all stakeholders, having important role to play in addressing the challenge to effective participation of marginalised people. Challenges like accessibility, availability and affordability of information services have to be addressed at regional, national and international level with participation of all stakeholders in their respective roles and responsibilities effectively.

13. How can enhanced cooperation address key issues toward global, social and economic development?

Since enhanced cooperation would facilitate establishment of a mechanism to formulate international internet related public policies with the participation of all stakeholders in their respective roles from developed and developing countries, the implementation of these policies would be able to address the issues toward global, social and economic development in a better way than today.

14. What is the role of various stakeholders in promoting the development of local language content?

Development of local language content is an important element in ensuring overall socioeconomic development. All stakeholders have an important role to play in generation, dissemination and consumption of the local language content. National governments would be responsible for creation of an enabling environment including, development of relevant standards, legal protection and business opportunities. Private sector would be responsible to provide innovative solutions to the challenge. Civil society would play a very important role in supporting and generating community interest towards local language content development.

15. What are the international internet-related public policy issues that are of special relevance to developing countries?

The issues important for developing countries include accessibility, affordability and availability of the information services and technologies. The public policy issues contained in our replies to Question No. 4 are also equally important for developing countries.

16. What are the key issues to be addressed to promote the affordability of the Internet, in particular in developing countries and least developed countries?

The key issues relating to affordability of the Internet, include the following:-

Co-location of content in geographically dispersed location along with Content Distribution Networks (CDNs)
Lowering of Interconnection costs
Internet Exchange Points with peering for routing local traffic and interconnection across borders
Location of Internet “host” computers in the country and/or region.
Regional backbones that interlink countries in the region and which also link to international backbones
Location of the root server systems in these countries
Interoperability and Net Neutrality - In response to the limitation posed by propriety software, alternative products such as Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and alternative licensing regimes (for example Creative Commons, Copy left etc.) to help reduce the costs and (legal) risks associated with proprietary software and content.
Multi-lingualization (Internationalized Domain Names and Local Language Content).
Affordability in accessing International internet connectivity.

17. What are the national capacities to be developed and modalities to be considered for national governments to develop Internet-related public policy with participation of all stakeholders?

The national capacities that need to be considered by national governments to develop Internet related public policy include:

Setting up of Centre of Excellence on Internet Governance and related issues.
Establishment of R&D centers in the area of Internet related Public Policy.
Introduction of formal courses on Internet governance in premier educational institutes for Industries, Academia & Civil Society.
Introduction of Training and Awareness building programmes in the area of Internet Governance.
Creation of online Knowledge Repository Portal on Internet Governance.

18. Are there other comments, or areas of concern, on enhanced cooperation you would like to submit?

Enhanced Cooperation is a dynamic process, and hence it requires periodic reassessment – based on the feedback from Governments as well as other relevant stakeholders, on any inter-governmental mechanism that is set up to oversee its operationalization.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/government-of-indias-response-to-wgec-questionnaire-1

Electoral Databases – Privacy and Security Concerns

snehashish — 2014-01-16T11:07:21Z

In this blogpost, Snehashish Ghosh analyzes privacy and security concerns which have surfaced with the digitization, centralization and standardization of the electoral database and argues that even though the law provides the scope for protection of electoral databases, the State has not taken any steps to ensure its safety.

The recent move by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to tie-up with Google for providing electoral look-up services for citizens and electoral information services has faced heavy criticism on the grounds of data security and privacy.[i] After due consideration, the ECI has decided to drop the plan.[ii]

The plan to partner with Google has led to much apprehension regarding Google gaining access to the database of 790 million voters including, personal information such as age, place of birth and residence. It could have also gained access to cell phone numbers and email addresses had the voter chosen to enroll via the online portal on the ECI website. Although, the plan has been cancelled, it does not necessarily mean that the largest database of citizens of India is safe from any kind of security breach or abuse. In fact, the personal information of each voter in a constituency can be accessed by anyone through the ECI website and the publication of electoral rolls is mandated by the law.

Publication of Electoral Rolls
The electoral roll essentially contains the name of the voter, name of the relationship (son of/wife of, etc.), age, sex, address and the photo identity card number. The main objective of creation and maintenance of electoral rolls and the issue of Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) was to ensure a free and fair election where the voter would have been able to cast his own vote as per his own choice. In other words, the main purpose of the exercise was to curtail bogus voting. This is achieved by cross referencing the EPIC with the electoral roll.

The process of creation and maintenance of electoral rolls is governed by the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Rule 22 requires the registration officer to publish the roll with list of amendments at his office for inspection and public information. Furthermore, ECI may direct the registration officer to send two copies of the electoral roll to every political party for which a symbol has exclusively been reserved by the ECI. It can be safely concluded that the electoral roll of a constituency is a public document[iii] given that the roll is published and can be circulated on the direction of the ECI.

With the computational turn, in 1998 the ECI took the decision to digitize the electoral databases. Furthermore, printed electoral rolls and compact discs containing the rolls are available for sale to general public.[iv] In addition to that, the electoral rolls for the entire country are available on the ECI website.[v] However, the current database is not uniform and standardized, and entries in some constituencies are available only in the local language. The ECI has taken steps to make the database uniform, standardized and centralized.[vi]

Security Concerns
The Registration of Electoral Rules, 1960 is an archaic piece of delegated legislation which is still in force and casts a statutory duty on the ECI to publish the electoral rolls. The publication of electoral rolls is not a threat to security when it is distributed in hard copies and the availability of electoral rolls is limited. The security risks emerge only after the digitization of electoral database, which allows for uniformity, standardization and centralization of the database which in turn makes it vulnerable and subject to abuse. The law has failed to evolve with the change in technology.

In a recent article, Bill Davidow analyzes "the dark side of Moore’s Law" and argues that with the growth processing power there has been a growth in surveillance capabilities and on this note the article is titled, “With Great Computing Power Comes Great Surveillance”[vii] Drawing from Davidow’s argument, with the exponential growth in computing power, search has become convenient, faster and cheap. A uniform, standardized and centralized database bearing the personal information of 790 million voters can be searched and categorized in accordance with the search terms. The personal information of the voters can be used for good, but it can be equally abused if it falls into the wrong hands. Big data analysis or the computing power makes it easier to target voters, as bits and pieces of personal information give a bigger picture of an individual, a community, etc. This can be considered intrusive on individual’s privacy since the personal information of every voter is made available in the public domain

For example, the availability of a centralized, searchable database of voters along with their age would allow the appropriate authorities to identify wards or constituencies, which has a high population of voters above the age of 65. This would help the authority to set up polling booths at closer location with special amenities. However, the same database can be used to search for density of members of a particular community in a ward or constituency based on the name, age, sex of the voters. This information can be used to disrupt elections, target vulnerable communities during an election and rig elections.

Current IT Laws does not mandate the protection of the electoral database
A centralized electoral database of the entire country can be considered as a critical information infrastructure (CII) given the impact it may have on the election which is the cornerstone of any democracy. Under Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) CII means “the computer resource, incapacitation or destruction of which, shall have debilitating impact on national security, economy.”[viii] However, the appropriate Government has not notified the electoral database as a protected system[ix]. Therefore, information security practices and procedures for a protected system are not applicable to the electoral database.

The Information Technology Rules (IT Rules) are also not applicable to electoral databases, per se. Since, ECI is not a body corporate, the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information), Rules, 2011 (hereinafter Reasonable Security Practices Rules) do not apply to electoral databases. Ignoring that Reasonable Security Practices Rules only apply to a body corporate, the electoral database does fall within the ambit of definition of “personal information”[x] and should arguably be made subject to the Rules.

The intent of the ECI for hosting the entire country’s electoral database online inter alia is to provide electronic service delivery to the citizens. It seeks to provide “electoral look up services for citizens ... for better electoral information services.”[xi] However, the Information Technology (Electronic Service Delivery) Rules, 2011 are not applicable to the electoral database given that it is not notified by the appropriate Government as a service to be delivered electronically. Hence, the encryption and security standards for electronic service delivery are not applicable to electoral rolls.

The IT Act and the IT Rules provide a reasonable scope for the appropriate Government to include electoral databases within the ambit of protected system and electronic service delivery. However, the appropriate government has not taken any steps to notify electoral database as protected system or a mode of electronic service delivery under the existing laws.

Conclusion
Publication of electoral rolls is a necessary part of an election process. It ensures free and fair election and promotes transparency and accountability. But unfettered access to electronic electoral databases may have an adverse effect and would endanger the very goal it seeks to achieve because the electronic database may pose threat to privacy of the voters and also lead to security breach. It may be argued that the ECI is mandated by the law to publish the electoral database and hence, it is beyond the operation of the IT Act. But Section 81 of the IT Act has an overriding effect on any law inconsistent, therewith. The appropriate Government should take necessary steps under the IT Act and notify electoral databases as a protected system.

It is recommended that the Electors Registration Rules, 1960 should be amended, taking into account the advancement in technology. Therefore, the Rules should aim at restricting the unfettered electronic access to the electoral database and also introduce purposive limitation on the use of the electoral database. It should also be noted that more adequate and robust data protection and privacy laws should be put in place, which would regulate the collection, use, storage and processing of databases which are critical to national security.

[i] Pratap Vikram Singh, Post-uproar, EC’s Google tie-up plan may go for a toss, Governance Now, January 7, 2014 available at http://www.governancenow.com/news/regular-story/post-uproar-ecs-google-tie-plan-may-go-toss

[ii] Press Note No.ECI/PN/1/2014, Election Commission of India , January 9, 2014 available at http://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/current/PN09012014.pdf

[iii] Section 74, Indian Evidence Act, 1872

[iv] eci.nic.in/eci_main1/the_function.aspx

[v] http://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/Linkto_erollpdf.aspx

[vi] “At present, in most States and UTs the Electoral Database is kept at the district level. In some cases it is kept even with the vendors. In most States/UTs it is maintained in MS Access, while in some cases it is on a primitive technology like FoxPro and in some other cases on advanced RDBMS like Oracle or Sql Server. The database is not kept in bilingual form in some of the States/UTs, despite instructions of the Commission. In most cases Unicode fonts are not used. The database structure not being uniform in the country, makes it almost impossible for the different databases to talk to each other” – Election Commission of India, Revision of Electoral Rolls with reference to 01-01-2010 as the qualifying date – Integration and Standardization of the database- reg., No. 23/2009-ERS, January 6, 2010 available at eci.nic.in/eci_main/eroll&epic/ins06012010.pdf

[vii] http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/01/with-great-computing-power-comes-great-surveillance/282933/

[viii] Section 70, Information Technology Act, 2000

[ix] Computer resource which directly or indirectly affects the facility of Critical Information Infrastructure

[x] Rule 2(1)(i), Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011

[xi] Press Note No.ECI/PN/1/2014, Election Commission of India , January 9, 2014 available at http://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/current/PN09012014.pdf

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/electoral-databases-2013-privacy-and-security-concerns

DoT — Its Powers and Responsibilities

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:24:19Z

The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) works under the aegis of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. DoT is headed a secretary, who is a senior member of the Indian Administrative Services. The secretary of the DoT reports to the Union Minister for Communications and Information Technology.

DoT used to provide basic telecommunication services. This function was shifted to BSNL after its formation in October, 2000. Presently, the main powers and responsibilities of the DoT as laid down in the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961 are:

Formulation of policy, allocation of licence and co-ordination with matters relating to telegraphs, telephones, wireless, data, facsimile and telematic services and other like forms of communications.
Co-operation with international bodies on matters related to telecommunication
Promotion of standardization and research and development in the telecom sector.
Promotion of private investment in telecommunication industry
Allocation of spectrum mobile and radio communications.
Administration of laws with respect to any of the matters specified in this list, namely: The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885); The Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (17 of 1933); and The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997).
Supervision over the functioning of the following organizations: Telecom Commission, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal, Centre for Development of Telematics, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, ITI Limited, Telecommunication Consultants (India) Limited and Administrative office of the Universal Service Obligation Fund.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/dot-its-powers-and-responsibilities

Comments on the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Draft)

snehashish — 2012-12-01T15:36:38Z

The Department of Science and Technology invited public comments on the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Draft). Accordingly, the Centre for Internet and Society has made the following comments on the draft policy document.

Department of Science and Technology,
Ministry of Science and Technology,
Government of India

Subject: Comments on the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Draft)

Dear Sir/Madam,

We at the Centre for Internet and Society commend the drafting of the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2013 (Draft). It is a well rounded policy which will pave the way for further informed policy decisions on innovation and research and development in the country.

Few of the notable and welcome policy statements are:

The Policy aims at ‘inclusive innovation’ and takes into consideration the “need to ensure access, availability and affordability of solutions to as large a population as possible”. It also aims at building a conducive environment for research and development by modifying the IPR policy to include marching rights with respect to social goods funded by public. This in line with the aim of the policy to provide access new technologies. The use of government funding in commercially viable research would not only assure better access to medicine and other technological innovations but also ensure knowledge transfer.

The policy decision to "foster data sharing and access" is most welcome and will act as a catalyst for further research and development through open and collaborative research and development.

Policy also lays emphasis on open source discoveries for "public and social good" and it is indeed a pleasure to note that the Policy wishes to build knowledge commons by collaborative generation of IPR. This will definitely go a long way in encouraging further innovation in the country.

It is also appreciated that the policy will aim at "increasing accessibility, availability and affordability of innovations" and will establish a fund for innovation in this direction.

The Policy also states that the "people" and "decision makers" should be made aware of the implications of emerging technologies, including their ethical, social and economic dimensions. Implementation of such policy is a necessity and will enable the government to make informed policy decisions in the future.

Suggestion:

It is submitted that the policy document should take into account that in order ensure ‘inclusive innovation’ and accessibility, the policy should specifically include mandates to encourage and foster innovation in technology related to accessibility tools for persons with disabilities.www.dst.gov.in/sti-policy.pdf

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/comments-on-science-technology-and-innovation-policy-draft

Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995

snehashish — 2013-03-15T06:10:46Z

In this module, Snehashish examines the purpose of the legislation, the persons affected by it, the administrative bodies which come under the Act, the penalties (including the consequences in case of non-compliance), appeal process and the debates surrounding the legislation.

Before the introduction of cable television in India, broadcasting was solely under the control of the State. The Government of India was caught unprepared with the emergence of cable networks and broadcasting through satellites in the early 1990s. The Government was not able to put a check on transmission and broadcast of television through foreign satellites.

The necessity of procuring licence for operating cable networks was first mentioned by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shiv Cable TV System v. State of Rajasthan.[1] In this case, the district magistrate ordered a ban on cable networks as they were being operated without licence. Subsequently the order of the district magistrate was challenged in the Rajasthan High Court on the ground that the order was in violation of fundamental right to freedom trade and profession. The high court held that there was no violation of the right to freedom of trade because cable networks fall within the definition of “wireless telegraph apparatus” under the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act and therefore it necessary to have licence to operate such network. This highlighted the need for having a framework for the regulation of cable networks in India which led to the enactment of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995.

Object of the Act

The object of the Act was to regulate the ‘haphazard mushrooming of cable television networks’. Due to the lack of licensing mechanism for cable operators; this resulted in large number of cable operators, broadcasting programmes without any regulation. The Act aimed at regulating content and operation of cable networks. This was due to the availability of signals from foreign television networks via satellite communication. The access to foreign television networks was considered to be a “cultural invasion” as these channels portrayed western culture. It also wanted to lay down the "responsibilities and obligations in respect of the quality of service both technically as well content wise, use of materials protected under the copyright law, exhibition of uncertified films, and protection of subscribers from anti-national broadcasts from sources inimical to national interests".

There were three amendments made to the Act.

The Act is divided into five chapters. The first chapter discusses the scope and extent of the Act and meaning of the terms used in the Act. The second chapter deals with "Regulation of Cable Television Network". The third chapter relates to "Seizure and Confiscation of certain Equipments". The fourth chapter focuses on "Offences and Penalties". The fifth chapter covers other miscellaneous provisions.

Regulation of Cable Television Network

The regulation of cable television network under the Act is ensured through a two step process. In order to keep track of cable operators, it has mandate a compulsory registration for cable operators. It also lays down provisions to regulate content to be broadcasted by the cable operator.

Registration of Cable Operators

In order to regulate cable television networks, it was made mandatory for cable television network operators to be registered.[2] Procedure for registration is laid down is section 5 of the Act. Any person who is operating or desires to operate a cable network may apply for registration to the registering authority.

An application for registration of cable operator has to be made under Form 1 along with the payment of fees of Rs.50 to the head post master within whose territorial jurisdiction the office of cable operator is situated. The registration certificate which is issued by the registering authority after inspection is valid for 12 months and can be renewed.

The registering authority may also refuse the registration of a cable operator. The reason for such refusal has to be recorded in writing and communicated to the applicant.

Section 4A was inserted into the Act by the TRAI (Amendment) Act, 2002. Section 4A deals with "transmission of programmes through addressable system". [Refer to section on “2003- Amendment to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (Amendment Act)"].

Content Regulation

The Central Government, in public interest can put an obligation on every cable operator to transmit or retransmit a programme[3] of any pay channel through addressable system. In public interest the central government may also ‘specify one or more free-to-air channels to be included in the package of channels’ (basic service tier). The Central Government may also, in public interest specify the maximum amount which can be charged by the operator to the subscriber for receiving the programmes transmitted in the basic service tier provided by such cable operators. The cable operators have to publicize to subscribers the subscription rates of each pay channel at regular intervals.

Sections 5 and 6 of the Act deal with advertisement code and programme code. All cable services should be in conformity with the codes. Under section 7, cable operators have to maintain a register as to the content transmitted or retransmitted. All cable operators shall compulsorily re-transmit Doordarshan channels.

Section 9 of the Act mandates ‘use of standard equipment in cable television network’. It is the duty of the cable operator to make sure that the cable television networks do not interfere with authorized telecommunication systems.

Offences and Penalties

Section 11 gives power to the authorized government authority to seize any cable operator’s equipment, if such officer has reason to believe that the cable operator is using the equipment without proper registration.

Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Act deal with offences under the Act. They lay down punishments for any act which is in contravention with the provisions of the Act.

Section	Ingredients of the Offence	Penalty/ Fine
16	Anyone who is held to be in violation of the provisions of this Act	For the first offence: Imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years or with fine which may extend to Rs. 1000 or with both. For every subsequent offence: Imprisonment for a term which may extend to 5 years and with fine which may extend to Rs. 5000.

Section 17 deals with when an offence under this Act is committed by a company; in this case the person in charge will be liable.

The Act also gives power to the authorized officer[4] to prohibit the transmission of certain programmes in public interest under section 19 of the Act.

Under section 20 of the Act, the Central Government in public interest may prohibit the operation cable television network. The Central Government may make such an order in the interest of the (i) sovereignty and integrity of India; or (ii) security of India; or (iii) friendly relations of India with any foreign state; or (iv) public order, decency or morality.

2003- Amendment to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (Amendment Act)

Numerous complaints were received by the Government stating that there has been unreasonable price hike in cable television by the cable operators. Moreover, the cable operator were not paying appropriate revenue by concealing there income and under-reporting their income. The cable operators defended themselves by stating that the broadcasting industry is unregulated and they are forced to increase the price for proving cable television services as the broadcasting companies can increase the charges as per their wish. In order to address these problems, the government appointed a specialized task force.

Special task force in its study noted that the consumers do not have the choice to select the premium channels they wanted to watch rather it is provided to them in a bundle irrespective of the fact they want to subscribe to such channel or not. In order to give choice to the consumer it recommended the introduction of conditional access systems (CAS). This would require the consumers to set up set-top boxes which will allow the consumers to view all the free to air channel and he can choose to watch any of the premier channels for a charge.

This recommendation of the task force was introduced through the 2003 amendment to the Act. The main objective of the Amendment Act was to address to the frequent and arbitrary increase in cable charges. This was introduced section 4A which allowed operators to transmit pay channels through an addressable system[5]apart from basic package of free-to-air channels.

There was a lot controversy with respect to implementation of the CAS. In order to explain the controversy, it is important to understand the structure of the cable market. The cable market is divided into three categories. Broadcasters, who are at the top of the pyramid, the Multi-System Operators are in the middle and the local cable operators are at the bottom of the pyramid.

The 2003 Amendment introduced to CAS was welcomed by the broadcasters and the MSOs. But the consumer and the local cable service providers were unhappy with this decision because the consumers feared that they have to pay special rates for pay channels whereas the local operators were outraged because they believed that CAS would affect their revenue. Due to the adverse reaction from the consumers and the local cable operator, the government delayed the implementation of CAS indefinitely. This finally culminated in a case[6] before the Delhi High Court.

The Delhi High Court decided that implementation of CAS cannot be delayed. Subsequently to this, the government announced in 2004 that Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) will be handling the problems regarding CAS and make recommendations on the same. TRAI recommended that CAS should be denotified and it can be re-introduced later when there is adequate regulation to properly implement it.

The government on the recommendation of TRAI withdrew the implementation of CAS. However, this decision was faced with a new challenge[7]and this time the single judge bench of the Delhi High Court held that the Government does not have any ground to suspend the CAS and it has disregarded the previous decision of the Delhi High Court in Jay Polychem case. Finally, the government re-introduced CAS but after issuing rules as to its working and implementation.

[1]. AIR 1993 Raj. 1997
[2]. Section 4 of the Act: "No person shall operate a cable television network unless he is registered a cable operator under this Act..."
[3]. Section 2(g): “programme means any television broadcast and includes –
i exhibition of films, features, dramas, advertisements and serials through video cassette recorders or video cassette player;
ii any audio or visual or audio-visual live performance or presentation and the expression “programming service” shall be construed accordingly
[4]. Section 2(a): authorized officer means within his local limit of jurisdiction
i a District Magistrate, or
ii a Sub Divisional Magistrate, or
iii a Commissioner of Police, and includes any other officer notified in the Official Gazette, by the Central Government or the State Government, to an authorized officer for such local limits of jurisdiction as may be determined by the Government.
[5]. Section 4-A, Explanation (a), Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995; Addressable system is defined as, "an electronic device or more than one electronic devices put in an integrated system through which signals of a cable television network can be sent in encrypted or unencrypted form, which can be decoded by the device or devices at the premises of the subscriber within the limits of authorisation made, on the choice and request of such subscriber, by the cable operator to the subscriber."
[6]. Jay Polychem v. Union of India, (2004) IV AD 249 (Del)
[7]. Hathaway Cable Datacom v. Union of India, 128 (2006) DLT 180

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/cable-television-networks-regulation-act

Broadband Policy, 2004

snehashish — 2013-03-15T05:47:53Z

The Broadband Policy, 2004 (“Policy”) was laid down by the Government of India in order to realize the potential of broadband services. It aimed at enhancing the quality of life by implementation of tele-education, tele-medicine, e-governance, entertainment and also to generate employment through high speed access to information and web-based communication.

Need for the Policy

Prior to the implementation of the Policy, broadband penetration was significantly low as compared to the other Asian countries. At the time of the implementation of the Policy the penetration of broadband, internet and personal computers were at 0.02 per cent, 0.4 per cent and 0.8 per cent respectively. There was not uniform standard for broadband speed and connectivity. Internet access was available at various speeds varying from 64 kilo bits per second to 128 kilo bits per second.

Broadband Connectivity

Under the Policy broadband connectivity is defined as:

An always-on data connection that is able to support interactive services including Internet access and has the capability of the minimum download speed of 256 kilo bits per second (kbps) to an individual subscriber from the Point Of Presence (POP) of the service provider intending to provide Broadband service where multiple such individual Broadband connections are aggregated and the subscriber is able to access these interactive services including the Internet through this POP. The interactive services will exclude any services for which a separate licence is specifically required, for example, real-time voice transmission, except to the extent that it is presently permitted under ISP licence with Internet Telephony.[1]

The key characteristics of broadband connectivity are

Always on data connection
Ability to support interactive services including internet access
Minimum download speed of 256 kilo bits per second
Does not include any services for which the internet service provider to procure separate licence such as real time voice transmission.

Targets of the Broadband Policy, 2004

The Policy had the following targets:

Year Ending	Internet Subscribers	Broadband Subscribers
2005	6 million	3 million
2007	18 million	9 million
2010	40 million	20 million

Technology Options for Broadband Services

The Policy envisioned the following technology options for better access to internet and broadband

Optical Fibre Technologies

Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) on copper loop

Cable TV network

Satellite Media

Terrestrial Wireless and

Other Future Technologies

The Policy emphasized on the implementation of broadband services through the copper loop. It also mentioned that Mahanagar Telecom Nigam Limited (MTNL) and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) would aggressively use their already existing broadband infrastructure to provide broadband services. It also indicated that the private internet service provider will enter into commercial agreements with the MTNL and BSNL to utilize their infrastructure to provide internet services.

Cable networks reached more people than copper telephone connections and therefore, the Policy envisaged that the cable networks can be utilized to provide broadband connections. The Policy also mentioned its intention to use very small aperture terminals (VSAT) and direct-to-home (DTH) for increasing broadband penetration as such technologies can be implemented in remote areas.

The Policy also mentioned that the Government had de-licensed 2.40-2.4835 GHz bands for low power indoor use (including Wi-Fi technologies based on the IEEE 802.11b and 802.11g standards).[2]

Quality of Service

The Policy recognized that the qualities of service parameters were of great importance and it requested Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to prescribe quality of service parameters for broadband service.

Other Mandates of Policy

The issues regarding cost of bandwidth for providing internet and broadband should be resolved Government and TRAI at the earliest.

The National Internet Exchange of India was set up by the Department of Information Technology to ensure that internet traffic originating from and destined for India should be routed within India.

Role of Other Agencies: Growth of broadband and internet services is dependent upon personal computers and content and application available on the internet. Therefore, it is necessary that other departments such as State Electricity Boards and the Department of Information Technology and other relevant authorities should also contribute to spreading broadband services in the rural areas.

Fiscal Issues: The Policy gives a high priority to indigenous manufacture of broadband related equipments. The Government to should endeavour to, make available, broadband and associated equipments at a low price.

The Policy aimed at providing broadband (minimum speed of 256 kbps) to 20 million subscribers. However, only 13 million subscribers have broadband connectivity as in May 2012.

[1].Broadband connectivity, available at http://www.dot.gov.in/ntp/broadbandpolicy2004.htm
[2]. Vikram Raghavan, Communications Laws in India (Legal Aspects of Telecom, Broadcasting and Cable Services), LexisNexis Butterworths, 2007, pp. 480-81

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/resources/broadband-policy-2004

Analyzing the Latest List of Blocked URLs by Department of Telecommunications (IIPM Edition)

snehashish — 2013-02-17T07:35:25Z

The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) in its order dated February 14, 2013 has issued directions to the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block seventy eight URLs. The block order has been issued as a result of a court order. Snehashish Ghosh does a preliminary analysis of the list of websites blocked as per the DoT order.

Medianama has published the DoT order, dated February 14, 2013, on its website.

What has been blocked?

The block order contains seventy eight URLs. Seventy three URLs are related to the Indian Institute of Planning and Management (IIPM). The other five URLs contain the term “highcourt”. The order also contains links from reputed news websites and news blogs including The Indian Express, Firstpost, Outlook, Times of India, Economic Times, Kafila and Caravan Magazine, and satire news websites Faking News and Unreal Times. The order also directs blocking of a public notice issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC).

The block order does not contain links to any social media website. However, some content related to IIPM has been removed but it finds no mention in the block order. Pursuant to which order or direction such content has been removed remains unclear. For example, Google has removed search results for the terms <Fake IIPM> pursuant to Court orders and it carries the following notice:

"In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org."

Are there any mistakes in the order?

The direction issued by the DoT is once again inaccurate and mired with errors. In effect, the DoT has blocked sixty one unique URLs and the block order contains numerous repetitions. By its order the DoT has directed the ISPs to block an entire blog [http://iipmexposed.blogspot.in] along with URLs to various posts in the same blog.

Reasons for Blocking Websites

According to news reports, the main reason for blocking of websites by the DoT is a Court order issued by a Court in Gwalior. The reason for issuing such a block order might have been a court proceeding with respect to defamation and removal of defamatory content thereof. However, the reasons for blocking of domain names containing the term ‘high court’, which is not at all related to the IIPM Court case is unclear. The DoT by its order has also blocked a link in the website of a internet domain registrar which carried advertisement for the domain name [www.highcourt.com].

Are the blocks legitimate?

The block order may have been issued by the DoT under Rule 10 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009.

The Court order seems to be an interim injunction in a defamation suit. Generally, Courts exercise utmost caution while granting interim injunction in defamation cases. According to the Bonnard Rule (Bonnard v. Perryman, [1891] 2 Ch 269) in a defamation case, “interim injunction should not be awarded unless a defence of justification by the defendant was certain to fail at trial level.” Moreover, in the case of Woodward and Frasier, Lord Denning noted “that it would be unjust to fetter the freedom of expression, when actually a full trial had not taken place, and that if during trial it is proved that the defendant had defamed the plaintiff, then should they be liable to pay the damages.” The Delhi High Court in Tata Sons Ltd. v. Green Peace International followed the Bonnard Rule and the Lord Denning’s judgements and ruled against the award of interim injunction for removal of defamatory content and stated:

“The Court notes that the rule in Bonnard is as applicable in regulating grant of injunctions in claims against defamation, as it was when the judgment was rendered more than a century ago. This is because the Courts, the world over, have set a great value to free speech and its salutary catalyzing effect on public debate and discussion on issues that concern people at large. The issue, which the defendant’s game seeks to address, is also one of public concern. The Court cannot also sit in value judgment over the medium (of expression) chosen by the defendant since in a democracy, speech can include forms such as caricature, lampoon, mime parody and other manifestations of wit.”

Therefore, it appears that the Court order has moved away from the settled principles of law while awarding an interim injunction for blocking of content related to IIPM. It is also interesting to note that in Green Peace International, the Court also answered the question as to whether there should be different standard for posting or publication of defamatory content on the internet. It was observed by the Court that publication is a comprehensive term, ‘embracing all forms and medium – including the Internet’.

Blocking a Public Notice issued by a Statutory Body of Government of India

The block order mentions a URL which contains a public notice issued by University Grants Commission (UGC) related to the derecognition of IIPM as a University. The blocking of a public notice issued by the statutory body of the Government of India is unprecedented. A public notice issued by a statutory body is a function of the State. It can only be blocked or removed by a writ order issued by the High Court or the Supreme Court and only if it offends the Constitution. However, so far, ISPs such as BSNL have not enforced the blocking of this URL.

Implementation of the order by the ISPs

As pointed out in my previous blog post on blocking of websites, the ISPs have again failed to notify their consumers the reasons for the blocking of the URLs. This lack of transparency in the implementation of the block order has a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analyzing-latest-list-of-blocked-urls-by-dot

Analyzing the Latest List of Blocked Sites (Communalism and Rioting Edition) Part II

snehashish — 2012-09-27T10:42:30Z

Snehashish Ghosh does a further analysis of the leaked list of the websites blocked by the Indian Government from August 18, 2012 till August 21, 2012 (“leaked list”).

Unnecessary Blocks and Mistakes:

http://hinduexistance.files.wordpress.com/..., which appears on the leaked list, does not exist because the URL is incorrect. However, the correct URL does contain an image which, in my opinion, can be considered to be capable of inciting violence. It has not been blocked due to a spelling error in the order. Instead of blocking hinduexistence.wordpress.com/... the DoT has ordered the blocking of hinduexistance.wordpress.com/..., which does not exist.
Two URLs in the block order are from the website of the High Council for Human Rights, Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The reason for blocking these two links from this particular website is unclear.
The website of the Union of NGOs of the Islamic World was blocked. Again, the reason for blocking this website remains unclear.
URLs such as, http://farazahmed.com/..., mumblingminion.blogspot.com, were blocked. The content on these URLs was in fact debunking the fake photographs.
Certain blocked Facebook pages did not have any bearing on the North East exodus which was the main reason behind the blocks. For example, Facebook link leading to United States Institute for Peace page was blocked.

Duration of the Block

The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) did not specify the period for which the block has been implemented in its orders. As a result of which certain URLs still remain blocked while a majority of the links in the leaked list can be accessed. Lack of clear directions from the DoT has resulted in haphazard blocking and certain internet service providers (ISPs) have lifted the block on certain links whereas some other ISPs have continued with a complete block.

How have the intermediaries reacted to the block orders?

Going by the leaked list of websites blocked by DoT, it issued the block orders to ‘all internet service licensees’. Intermediaries that do not fall in the category of 'internet service licensees’ were also sent a separate set of requests for taking down third party content. However, it is unclear under which provision of the law such request was made by the Government.

Internet Service Licensees

The internet service licensee or the ISPs have not followed any uniform system to notify that a particular URL or website in the leaked list is blocked according to DoT’s orders. The lack of transparency in the implementation of the block orders, have a chilling effect on free speech.

For instance, BSNL returns the following messages:

"This website/URL has been blocked until further notice either pursuant to Court orders or on the Directions issued by the Department of Telecommunications" or “This site has been blocked as per instructions from Department of Telecom (DOT).”

However, these messages are not uniform across all the URLs/websites in the leaked list. BSNL does not generate any response for the majority of the URLs in the leaked list. This results in ‘invisible censorship’ as the person who is trying to access the blocked URL does not have any means to know whether a particular URL is unavailable or certain sites are blocked by government orders.

Lack of notification does not only infringes upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression but also violates the fundamental right to a constitutional remedy guaranteed under Article 32 of our Constitution. The person aggrieved by such block orders cannot approach the Court for a remedy because there is no means to figure out:

(a) Description of the content blocked?

(b) Who has issued the block order/request?

(d) Who has implemented the block order/request? and

(e) What was the reason for the block?

The intermediaries should provide with the above notification details while implementing a block order issued by the Government.

Intermediaries hosting third party content:

More than 100 out of the 309 blocks are Facebook (http and https) URLs. Facebook has not informed its users about the reasons behind unavailability of certain pages or content. This is another instance of invisible censorship. However, YouTube, a Google service, has maintained certain level of transparency, and informs the user that the content has been blocked as per ‘government removal request’. It is interesting to note that certain YouTube user accounts were terminated as well. It is unclear whether this was as a result of the block order. Furthermore, links associated with blogger.com, which is another service provided by Google, have been removed.

This was re-posted by Medianama on September 26, 2012.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/analyzing-the-latest-list-of-blocked-sites-communalism-and-rioting-edition-part-ii

Analysis of the content blocked.

snehashish — 2012-09-25T07:01:05Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/chart_2.png