The Internet&rsquo;s a-buzz, Twitter&rsquo;s a-twitter, and outrage is pouring in, from several quarters. The cause and the target? The reported action of the Government of India, in &lsquo;asking Telecom Operators and Internet Service Providers to block 857 porn sites&rsquo;.
<img src="http://images.mid-day.com/images/2015/aug/Computer.jpg" alt="" />
Rumours are flying around, but hard facts are difficult to come by, including inter alia the notification, if any, ordering such ban / blockage. Nor does it appear certain, which are these 857 sites. Apparently, the Chief Justice of India had expressed certain reservations about just such a ban, when on July 9, the Government asked for an interim order to block pornographic websites, reportedly stating: &ldquo;Such interim orders cannot be passed by this court.
<img src="http://images.mid-day.com/images/2015/aug/Stop-hand.jpg" alt="" />
Somebody may come to the court and say look I am above 18 and how can you stop me from watching it within the four walls of my room. It is a violation of Article 21 ...&rdquo; On what basis the government has, in its wisdom, issued such an order if it has so issued is then a mystery! Hopefully, the Government will explain, clarify and make known its stand and reasons.
Hear Hopefully, before that, the Government will initiate a debate, and listen to reasons and views other than its own, and make an informed decision, after taking into consideration, the views of others i.e., neutral parties, with no stake in the matter, except, of course, concerns about individual freedoms, personal liberty, and the desire to protect those from encroachment by the State.
This article does not attempt to get into legalities, or to analyze the law or legal judgements on this or any point. This article attempts rather, to analyze the wisdom of such a ban, as also the practicalities of enforcement and implementation thereof. It also aims to caution how such a ban could have tremendous potential for misuse and discrimination.
It hopes to suggest alternative methods, by which the intent behind such a ban, if indeed the intent is bonafide, could be met, by other means, without a blanket ban which would not only be difficult to monitor and implement fairly and impartially, but which would have the additional disadvantage of being misused against even innocent persons. Moreover, which would have the potential of being enforced selectively, with the possibility of discriminating to settle scores.
Bedrooms What an adult does behind closed doors is his / her business, within reason. The government would do well to stay out of bedrooms, as also living rooms, and now, also computer screens!
That is not to say that child porn is to be encouraged, and no action taken, when it is brought to the notice of the authorities. The rights of the child are indeed paramount, and deserve protection. But is banning so-called &lsquo;porn sites&rsquo; the answer?
This is an easy, and lazy, way out! What the government needs to do is to crack down on paedophiles and child pornographers in real, not virtual life! The virtual would not exist without the real. Also, there are means of dissemination, beyond internet sites. If the government is serious about stamping out child pornography, it needs to address the problem at its root.
Dangers There are dangers galore, in these kind of blanket, sweeping bans and blocks. What is pornography itself could be and would be debated ad nauseum, given diverse subjective opinions, which would just not admit to a uniform objectivity. This is so much a product of one&rsquo;s upbringing, education, conditioning, as also inherent inclination and individual mindset. Someone&rsquo;s harmless joke could be for someone else, prurient porn.
Ditto with the vexed problem of defining &lsquo;sexual harassment&rsquo; a compliment to some would be sexual harassment to others. So, who decides? Would decisions be unanimous, and/or even consistent? Would even two persons in the government be able to agree on what is porn, and what is not? What of sexual orientation? Does this also qualify as &lsquo;porn&rsquo;? Sexual kinks, divergent sexual mores, adult content viewed to get over sexual dysfunction, perhaps even advised / prescribed by doctors / psychiatrists / sexologists &hellip; ???
How would such a ban / block be monitored? Why 857 sites? What if new sites spring up? What if methods of dissemination of such content get more ingenious, and ahead of enforcement? Will the government keep adding to the number of &lsquo;blocked&rsquo; sites on a daily basis? will it be able to monitor, and enforce, when it is unable to enforce and implement extant laws and even Judgements of the Court, yes, even of the Hon&rsquo;ble Supreme Court of India?
The Government cannot even ensure motorists do not break red lights on the roads (Of course, this had to come in! J ) Does it have the resources and the personnel, and even the expertise to ensure / enforce bans / blocks uniformly and fairly against all truly pornographic content? Or will this become just another tool for harassment, in the hands of the powers-that-be?
Rather than such blanket bans, it would be better if the Government invested in mechanism/s to have proper, transparent grievance cell/s, to address individual complaints. The Government can protect the populace, while leaving them their liberty. Address our grievances and complaints, Mesdames and Sirs, stay out of our houses, and our computers. Please do yourselves this favour, too!
The writer is a counsel in the High Court and author of several fiction and travel books

Better nuanced approach would help in fight against porn, says cyber law expert

Stay out of our bedrooms, living rooms and computer screens

Ban on porn : Let's debate before deciding

Trending Stories

Latest Photos

Latest Videos

Latest Web Stories

Mid-Day Fast

Home / Mumbai / Mumbai News / Article / Ban on porn : Let's debate before deciding

Ban on porn : Let's debate before deciding

Trending Stories

Latest Photos

Latest Videos

Latest Web Stories

Mid-Day Fast