Social Media, Free Speech, And Constitutional Limits: Where Do We Draw The Line?
- IJLLR Journal
- 3 days ago
- 2 min read
Sanjana S Tholoor, B.A.LL.B., Vaikunta Baliga College of Law
ABSTRACT
The Indian Constitution, guarantees to its citizens certain rights under part III of the Constitution. One among them happens to be Freedom of Speech and Expression under article 19(1)(a). It guarantees to the citizens the freedom to express their opinion by way of writing, print, oral speech or any other ways, subject to the restrictions under article 19(2). This, by being a fundamental right, had made sure the existence of the democratic government is very much intact and staunch from its foundation. The certain restrictions attached to the freedom made sure that the right conferred is not abused or misused by the masses, contrary to the established principles of Constitution and the democratic functioning. But the real question which is to be evaluated is the extent where the line of curtailment is to be drawn, which will be in accordance with the prescribed conditions of article 19(2). The question brings us to the current situation around the world, where certain restrictions are posed arbitrarily and unarbitrarily on the freedom of speech and expression under the Indian Constitution.
This article expands over the horizons paved by article 19(1)(a), where it tries to evaluate the needs for the restrictions, with reference to the article 19(2) and with the instances which happened, and the situations where such limits may be taken as a way of exercising unnecessary censorship for the authorities imposing it. It scours through these matters through the help of analysing both of these articles, starting from its historical inception. It also goes through several judicial precedents which are very much relevant as well. Thus, the article explores the importance of articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2) by analysing several instances in the country which make it necessary for the stricter implementation of the latter, focusing simultaneously on preventing the undermining of the spirit of constitutional supremacy through the overriding of the former.
