Lok Sabha committee tells Kapil Sibal to re-examine the Information Technology Rules 2011

SFLC.in has a quick summary:

The Thirty-first Report of the Committee on Subordinate Legislation (2012-2013) was presented in the Lok Sabha today on 21 March, 2013 by Shri P. Karunakaran, Chairman of the Committee.

The Committee examined the following rules:-

(i) The Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011[GSR 313(E)]

(ii) The Information Technology (IntermediariesCommittee Report Guidelines) Rules, 2011[GSR314 (E)]

(iii) The Information Technology (Guidelines for Cyber Cafe) Rules, 2011[GSR315(E)]

(iv) The Information Technology (Electronic Service Delivery) Rules, 2011[GSR316 (E)]

The Committee made the following observations:

The Committee have observed that the terms, grossly harmful, harassing, blasphemous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, pedophilic, libelous, invasive of another’s privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically objectionable, disparaging, or otherwise unlawful in any manner whatsoever used in Rule 3 of the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011 have not been defined either in the Rules or in the Information Technology Act, 2000. These words / terms have, however, been dealt within the Indian constitution and also defined in relevant Indian laws such as Indian Penal Code, Cr. PC, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, etc. and have been also interpreted by Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts in their various judgements. The Committee while drawing the attention of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (Department of Electronics & Information Technology) to the recent instances of reported misuse of Section 66A of the IT Act due to absence of precise definitions of terms used in the Section, have recommended that in order to remove ambiguity/misgivings in the minds of the people, the definition of those terms used in different laws should be incorporated at one place in the aforesaid rules for convenience of reference by the intermediaries and general public and the terms which have not been defined in any other statute should be defined and incorporated in the rules to ensure that no new category of crimes or offences is created in the process of delegated legislation.  (Para No. 25)

The Committee have desired the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology to have a fresh look at the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011, and make such amendments as necessary to ensure that there is no ambiguity in any of the provisions of the said rules. (Para No. 26)

As per rule 3 of the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines), Rules, it is mandatory on the part of the Intermediary to disable non-compliant information within 36 hours, which in Intermediary’s view contravenes the laid down rules/regulations. The Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, however held the view that the guidelines in Rule 3(2) are of only advisory nature and self regulation. The Committee have, therefore, felt that there is need for clarity as the Department of Electronics and Information Technology has presented a conflicting picture with regard to legal enforceability of these guidelines.  (Para No. 49)

The foreign intermediaries, on whose server infringing information is posted, reportedly do not cooperate with the Govt. of India to share the information related to user posting such content. It has been stated that they refuse to honour Indian laws, with the result, the malicious content posted on their websites is not removed on the pretext that it does not violate the law of their country . The Committee have not expected an expression of helplessness from the Government in this regard and have urged the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology to take such steps as deemed necessary to enlist their co-operation.  (Para No. 50)

Sub rule (2) of Rule 6 of Information Technology (Guidelines for Cyber Café) Rules, stipulates that screens of the computers installed other than in partitions and cubicles should face open space of the cyber café. The Committee felt that by allowing every computer screen to be seen by a bystander, the privacy and security of every user would be invaded. The Committee have, therefore, recommended that the sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 should be modified suitably to ensure that privacy of the users is not intruded for legitimate purposes.  (Para No. 72)

The Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee (CRAC) which was constituted when the IT Act was enacted in the year 2000, met only twice, once in the year 2000 and then in 2001 and thereafter, no meeting was held. On the matter being taken up by the Committee, the CRAC has been reconstituted. The Committee have urged upon the Ministry of Information Technology (Department of Electronics & Information Technology) to make the CRAC functional and benefit from its advice particularly in the context of having a fresh look at the rules and amendment of rules recommended in this report. (Para Nos. 79

3 thoughts on “Lok Sabha committee tells Kapil Sibal to re-examine the Information Technology Rules 2011”

  1. i do not understand how the us becomes so important. What about the Indian Supreme Court is it blind to all that has happened?

  2. I am of the opinion that IT is not only a new technology, it is also a rapidly innovating one. Obsolescence is very fast here. It is beyond the capacity of a laid back and backward organization like the government to keep it in check. They had better keep away till they themselves become quick enough to have reflexes required with a rapidly evolving science and technology. Governments, especially Indian ones, regulating Science and Technology is as backward as religion trying to regulate governance. It would be prudent for our Power & Control oriented government to keep away from hot potatoes lest they have to hastily drop them ! We have the experience of 44 years’ of centralized planning and public sector at commanding heights, resulting in the Hindu Rate of growth. The 1991 economic reforms brought about a spurt in growth rate. Do we want to encourage criminalization by senseless barricading of something that we do not as yet, fully comprehend ? Innovators are always more intelligent than regulators. Instead of helping society, they would take concentrate on fooling the government. The government is no better than a Khap Panchayat when it comes to dealing with IT !

We look forward to your comments. Comments are subject to moderation as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s