BANNING OF CHINESE APPS IN INDIA- (Blog)


Where the whole world is fighting against the deadly coronavirus, India is also fighting a battle with its neighbouring country China. Where there is high tension on the indo-china border and the dispute regarding the stretch of land along the Sino-India border continues, the digital connections with China are now being withdrawn by India.

On 29th June, 2020, India banned 59 Chinese apps including social media platforms such as tik-tok, helo, WeChat and other apps as well such as UC browser, shareit, shein, etc. According to the Indian government such measures has been taken to protect the interest of the nation and for its security. The government through its press release by the ministry of electronics and information technology stated that’s these apps were a threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the nation and these apps were being used by the neighbouring country to transfer the data from the Indian users to other countries unauthorizedly. Even after banning of these 49 apps, 47 more apps were operating as colons of the previously banned apps. A list of 275 apps has been prepared lately by the government. The government will conduct scrutiny of these applications to ensure that they are not in violation of the security and integrity of the country. The list includes popular gaming app PUBG, economic giant ALIBABA, XIAOMI, and other Chinese apps.

 

LAW APPLICABLE

The Indian government’s decision of banning these Chinese apps has been exercised under section 69A of the information technology act, 2000 that reads with certain provisions of Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by the citizens) Rules, 2009. The sections give power to the government to ban any website or application that imposes some kind of threat to the countries defence, sovereignty, integrity, or law and order of the country. This section can also be used in case of an “emergency” where an interim measure issuing the ban of the website can be directed. 

Since the information on the banning of 59 Chinese app was disclosed by the government through a press release and no detailed information was given for the same so the act of banning these apps is void ab- intio, as it does not, fulfill the requirement of section 69A of IT act.

In Shreya Singhal v/s Union of India [1], the Supreme Court held that section 69A was constitutional and a ban on applications can be imposed through a detailed and reasoned order. The court also said that the ban can be issued only on the committee’s approval and after the hearing of the aggrieved party and the reason for such blocking has to be clearly stated in writing even in case of emergency.

 There are certain rules that have been led down in Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by the citizens) Rules, 2009 also known as the blocking rules that are to be followed by the government before passing the blocking orders. However, these sets of rules were not completed by the government while banning 59 Chinese apps in India and the action of the government was not in conformity with the rule of law.

 

CONCLUSION 

Though the actions of the government aimed at protecting the security of the nation but these actions did not satisfy the legal provisions of section 64A of IT act. Proper blocking procedure was not followed by the government. The government is bound to provide proper reasoning of its orders to block such applications to protect the right to information of the citizens. If the government takes such actions in the future then it must ensure that a proper procedure is followed while doing so that its decisions can sustain all legal challenges imposed on it.

  

[1] Singhal v. Union of India, (2013) 12 S.C.C. 73

-Akanksha Mishra
Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management Studies.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MARITAL RAPES IN INDIA: AN UGLY REALITY- (Blog)

Image
Marriage is a very pure tie of two human beings based on their common love and respect for each other. When it comes to my view on marriage I completely agree with a dialogue in a famous Indian movie Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna Kehte Hain shaadi ki buniyaad sirf aur sirf beinteha mohhabat honi chaahiye kyunki agar buniyaad galat ho to rishte toot jaate hain (A marriage should always be based on immense love for each other cause a relationship based on anything else can’t continue long). In our Indian society, every so often marriages are ‘arranged’ by the parents of a girl and a boy. The girl’s family usually considers a boy who is earning well and has some family property a good match for their girl while the boy’s family every so often looks for a good-looking girl who can cook and do other household chores efficiently as being a perfect match for their boy. So, you can understand very well, love is something most disregarded when we talk about marriage in India. In such a situation,
Read more

CYBER CRIME : A NEW BREED OF CRIMINAL- (Article)

Image
  ABSTRACT Cybercrimes are a new class of crimes to India speedily expanding due to wide use of Internet. Dishonest and greedy people take gain of easy and free access to Internet and perform any acts to please their needs. The requirement could be physiological or psychological in nature. Online shopping and extensive use of “social media” are root cause of cybercrimes. Much cognizance created for cybercrimes and users were educated. But still individuals do not complain it to authorities. Even somebody do it then also police or crime branch incapable to clear such complains in practical time period. Postponement in justice will lead to NO registration of complain. This is not healthy condition in free democratic INDIA. The law IT (Information Technology) Act 2000 and numerous sections of the IPC are in place but in large population country like India and China, it is very difficult to regulate crime caused by cyber world. We need to have self-discipline for better society. We sha
Read more

Joseph Shine Vs. Union of India and Ors. - (Case Commentary)

Image
  JOSEPH SHINE ………………………………… PETITIONER V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS…………………………….RESPONDENT (Writ Petition Cr. Appeal no. 194 of 2017)   COURT : THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DECISION : 27 JULY 2018 BENCH : DEEPAK MISHRA                  JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR                  JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD                  JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA                  JUSTICE R.F. NARIMAN RELEVANT ACT/SECTIONS/ARTICLES : ARTICLE 15, 21 and ARTICLE 14                                                                               RIGHT TO LIFE                                                                               RIGHT TO EQUALITY                                                      SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE Joseph Shine, an Italian based Indian businessman, who hails from Kerala, filed a Public Interest Litigation ( PIL ) in the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution, which gives the power to citizens
Read more