Hi
http://164.100.47.5/newdebate/225/17052012/12.00NoonTo13.00pm.pdf
http://164.100.47.5/newdebate/225/17052012/14.00pmTo15.00pm.pdf
http://164.100.47.5/newdebate/225/17052012/15.00pmTo16.00pm.pdf
There were detailed discussions in the house regarding the IT rules annulment
.
P Rajeev(cpim)
started out by pointing out in detail the issues, he started by how the
rules ultra-vires the parent act and are undermining the parliament.
He stated that he was okay with regulation but not with
control of the internet. He showed the problematic and
vague provisions which ultra vires the basic act and also affect freedom
of speech. He quoted the UN on how censorship cannot be entrusted with
intermediaries or private parties. Arun Jaitely(BJP), Leader of
Opposition pointed out the difference between other media and the
internet. How the emergency of 1975 may not have been a reality if the
internet was not there.He was categorical and launched an attack on the
vague words in the act like 'blasphemous', 'defamatory' etc. Members of
other parties like NK Singh ( JDU), Tirchy Siva, D Raja(CPI)
explained the problems with the rules and how its untenable to censor
the internet. The members also quoted international best practises and how the
current IT rules are vague. The
minsiter defended the current rules and said how these are necessary.
However he finally conceded an assurance. He requested to
write to
him on any issues that they are concerned about,and assured the House,
to take those issues into account. He said he would also call the
Industry. and have a full discussion on the subject;,He said under this
new media, there would be several challenges that this nation would
face, and we should be ready for those challenges.
That can only be done through consensus and
collaboration. P. RAJEEVEV(cpim): pointed out that Shri Kapil
Sibal in his reply was looking at clause 69A. Now, clause 69A is in
accordance with
article 19(2) of the Constitution. The Minister must
not look at this clause in isolation. It is specifically mentioned in
clause 69A
what objectionable content is, and it is in accordance
with article 19(2)(a). He submitted , while the Minister explained that,
the
question is about clause 3(2). This clause, from (a) to (j),explains what an
objectionable content is. It goes beyond the
provisions
of clause 69 of the Act. That is the basic question. The reply given by
the Minister is not satisfactory on that point.
ARUN JAITLEY: Can the hon. Minister give an assurance to this House that the
Rules, after this broad-based discussion, will be relooked at, and if there are
any words therein, which require to be replaced or removed, the Minister would
replace or
remove
them? Are you agreeable for that?
THE MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT (SHRI KAPIL SIBAL):
My assurance to this House is that I will request distinguished hon. Members to
write letters to me objecting to any
specific
words. I will then call a meeting of the Members as well as the
industry and all the stakeholders. We will have a discussion
and whatever consensus emerges, we will implement it.
_______________________________________________
network mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
