India Bans Chinese Apps

What is the issue?

The Centre has officially banned 59 Chinese apps.
This ban has brought to the fore the ‘national security versus digital rights’ question.

Why did India ban these apps?

This ban came after clashes erupted between the Chinese and Indian troops in Galwan valley in Ladakh.
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) said that it has received complaints that these apps misuse user data.
There are reports that these apps transmit users’ data in an unauthorised manner to servers that have locations outside India.
The MeitY said that many citizens have shared their concerns regarding the data security and risk to privacy relating to operation of certain apps.

How did India block these apps?

The MeitY invoked its power under the Section 69A of the Information Technology (I-T) Act.
The MeitY said that, using this Act, it blocked these apps to safeguard the sovereignty and integrity of India.

Why the usage of Section 69A of the I-T Act criticized?

It is criticised that the Act isn’t designed for data protection compliance.
It is also argued that Section 69A is set for violations that are more specific rather than broad general violations.
The ‘security of the state’ ground is what the Union as well as many State governments have unfortunately taken very wide views of.
However, data protection is not one of the grounds.
More importantly, Section 69A is a censorship power, which is not well designed to protect people’s rights.

What are the other criticisms?

The concerns around national security or other geopolitical concerns have intervened to result in this censorship administrative action.
Banning of the apps is seen as a proxy for a larger geopolitical battle.
The test of proportionate restriction may have not been met.
The government didn’t follow the three-part test while taking such steps that may intrude upon people’s fundamental rights and freedoms.
[Three-part test - That requires action that is very clear; that could not have been done by a less intrusive means; and that follows standards of necessity and proportionality.]

What was the problem with the process followed by India?

India should have first investigated the entities.
It should have then seen whether other mechanisms like orders, fines, etc., could be followed.
Instead, the Centre has done an emergency blocking order.

Then, it has said that these platforms should perhaps come to them and make a case as to why they should be unblocked.
The Centre has said that, only after such a case, these interim orders could be overridden.

How India sees digital rights?

India is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
So, it has a basic understanding that regulating the Internet by governments has to respect basic human rights standards.
In India, it is very clear that our fundamental right to free speech and expression applies to online content too.

How the trade-off could be resolved?

Section 69A of the I-T Act is not a new power that the government is commandeering during a time of national security emergency.
But, the necessity of blocking the app must be very clearly made out by the government.
In this way, we can resolve the question of where we can draw the line between this trade-off between national security and rights.

What could be done to make the system fairer?

Currently, when the Government issues blocking orders under Section 69A of the I-T Act, it asserts secrecy and confidentiality in those orders.
The government should immediately stop asserting that privilege, so that the public knows what is being blocked and for what reason.
It can also undertake broader reforms.
It can review the Section 69A of the I-T Act itself.
National security agencies must be brought under a legal framework where people can understand what everybody’s powers are.
If these agencies have overstepped their bounds, there must be consequences as there are consequences for everyone else.

Source: The Hindu