Victory of Kunal Kamra for Free Speech over IT Act 2000

In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court declared unconstitutional the amendments to the Information Technology Act, which would have allowed the government to establish a Fact Check Unit (FCU) to identify “fake or misleading content” against it on social media platforms. Stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra, who was a petitioner in the case, hailed the decision by sharing the preamble of the Indian Constitution. The ruling, delivered by Justice JS Chandurkar, concluded that the FCU violated Articles 14 and 19, guaranteeing equality and freedom of speech.

The Controversy

The controversy stems from amendments to the Information Technology Act made by the central government that proposed creating a Fact Check Unit (FCU). The unit’s primary role would have been to flag fake, false, or misleading content online, specifically targeting information about the government on social media platforms. However, this amendment faced immediate backlash, with critics, including prominent personalities like Kunal Kamra, accusing the government of infringing on freedom of speech and using the FCU as a tool for censorship.

The Bombay High Court’s Ruling

The dispute reached the Bombay High Court when Kunal Kamra, a well-known comedian, challenged the amendments as a violation of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law, while Article 19 protects the right to freedom of speech and expression. A two-judge bench had previously delivered a split verdict on the case, and the final decision was referred to Justice JS Chandurkar for a tiebreaker opinion.

On September 20, 2024, Justice Chandurkar delivered his ruling, agreeing with Kamra’s petition and stating that the amendments were unconstitutional. The judge reasoned that the proposed Fact Check Unit would violate both Articles 14 and 19 by empowering the government to control information about itself, thus undermining the principles of transparency and free speech.

Kunal Kamra’s Reaction

Following the judgment, Kunal Kamra took to social media to express his satisfaction. He posted a picture of the preamble to the Indian Constitution, asserting that the people of India would always uphold the Constitution and hold those in power accountable. His post garnered widespread attention, highlighting the growing concern among many citizens about government overreach.

They may keep trying, but we the people of India will always uphold the constitution to humble those who are drunk on Power… pic.twitter.com/vetaJFR6kW

— Kunal Kamra (@kunalkamra88) September 20, 2024

Implications for Free Speech

This ruling is a critical win for advocates of free speech and transparency in India. The FCU had raised concerns about potential misuse, as critics feared it could serve as a tool for censorship under the guise of fact-checking. By striking down the amendment, the court has reaffirmed the importance of maintaining an open space for dissent and criticism of the government.

The judgment has broader implications, as it sets a precedent for challenging similar laws or rules in the future that may threaten the fundamental rights of Indian citizens. Many activists and legal experts believe that this ruling will discourage attempts to stifle free speech through legislation that concentrates too much power in the hands of the government.

Conclusion

The Bombay High Court’s ruling against the government’s Fact Check Unit is a victory for free speech and transparency. Kunal Kamra, a key petitioner, successfully challenged the amendments, leading to their dismissal as unconstitutional. This decision is not only a win for Kamra but also for all citizens concerned about maintaining their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution.

References Kunal Kamra’s twitter post

times of india news article