Administrative Necessity Or Executive Overreach: Decoding The Constitutional Mechanics Of Section 69A Of The Information Technology Act, 2000
- IJLLR Journal
- Jul 2
- 2 min read
Mitali Mishra, LLB, Dayanand College of Law, Kanpur University
ABSTRACT
The Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000 can be considered the core of the legal regime governing India's internet regulation (online content). It vests sovereign powers on the State enabling it to restrict access to internet content. Although this section was constitutionally justified in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) based on the procedural guarantees available, the present day use of this section demonstrates a growing disparity between the legislative intention and execution. In this paper, the constitutional dynamics of Section 69A will be analysed in order to ascertain whether its operation today amounts to an indispensable requirement of administration of the State for ensuring national security or executive overreach. In the context of the changes in regulations including the abolishment of the intermediary safe harbor and the introduction of the notion of "architectural liability," this paper discusses the systematic violation of the principle of procedural fairness. The focus is on the 2009 Blocking Rules under which the general confidentiality provision (Rule 16) and the frequent resorting to emergency powers (Rule 9) silence the right to audi alteram partem (hearing).1 Through a test of these provisions in light of the proportionality doctrine laid down in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs Union of India (2017) case, this study shows how the obfuscation and heavy-handedness of such a procedure act as a deterrent to the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). What the Journal seeks to say is that the obsolete structure of the IT Act is simply incapable of handling the modern realities of algorithmic filtering and encryption.
Keywords: Section 69A, Information Technology Act, Executive Overreach, Article 19(1)(a), Digital Rights, Proportionality Doctrine, Intermediary Liability, Architectural Blocking, National Security, Administrative Necessity.
