New Delhi: Manipur shutdown the Internet for 5,000 hours in 2023, the longest such cumulative outage in the world, while India’s economy lost more than half a billion dollars or about Rs 4,800 crore, according to two new global reports.
India was fifth globally by economic losses from such shutdowns, said a January 2024 report from Top10VPN, a UK research firm, and Internet shutdowns surged 18% in 2023 over the previous year, according to the latest data from sflc.in, a legal services think tank and advocacy group.
The Rajasthan government ordered the lastest shutdown in India on 7 January 2024 in several districts, claiming possible law-and-order disruptions because of exams to select state bureaucrats, the latest of several such shutdowns on or before exams.
On 2 January, the Manipur government suspended the Internet in nine districts, the latest in a series of shutdowns after fresh violence in a state where 175 deaths have been reported in eight months of bloodletting, rioting, and arson.
There were 84 Internet shutdowns in India in 2022, the highest number of such suspensions of any country for the fifth consecutive year, according to a November 2023 report by Access Now and the KeepItOn coalition, both advocacy groups.
Livelihoods, education and human rights have been disrupted in these Internet shutdowns, the reports and experts have noted. On 17 May 2023, a Manipuri student union called MitSna wrote an open letter to chief Minister Nongthombam Biren Singh saying widespread and seemingly ceaseless Internet shutdowns in the state had disrupted their lives.
“The Internet ban which was initially slated to be lifted by 13th May, has now been extended until 23rd May,” said the letter. “If this situation persists, there is a risk that the students may have to take a gap year, thereby jeopardizing their academic and career prospects.”
The surge in Internet shutdowns in India comes despite a January 2020 Supreme Court order that severely restricted the power of state governments to impose such shutdown and put in place a system of official and judicial review.
These orders, our analysis across six states shows, are being ignored or circumvented by using legal technicalities.
In January 2020, the Supreme Court, in a case called Anuradha Bhasin vs Union Of India, restricted government powers to shut down the Internet. “Proportionality and necessity” should guide such shutdowns, said the court, which said such an order must be published and reviewed every seven days by a committee of three led by the chief secretary in a state or the cabinet secretary when issued by the union government.
The Supreme Court said that “freedom of speech and expression and the freedom to practice any profession or carry on any trade, business or occupation over the medium of internet enjoys constitutional protection”.
Ten months later, in November 2020, the union government amended the Telecom Suspension Rules (Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services) 2017.
In July 2023, the government told the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of Parliament that the amendment had been “forwarded” to all state governments “emphasizing” that the Supreme Court had “mandated the publication of suspension orders; and all orders for suspension must adhere to the principle of proportionality and must not extend beyond the necessary duration”.
Yet, there were 100, 77 and 92 Internet shutdowns in the three years following the order, the sflc.in tracker shows.
The most shutdowns in the last nine years were reported from Jammu and Kashmir (428), followed by Rajasthan (99), Manipur (44) and Uttar Pradesh (33), with reasons ranging from civil unrest to exams.
The Supreme Court’s Orders
In Anuradha Bhasin, the Supreme Court said the right to free speech and the freedom to conduct one's trade or profession through the Internet was a fundamental right.
The court issued what are commonly known as the Anuradha Bhasin guidelines, which governments are supposed to follow:
- Internet suspension orders must be published in the public domain to enable a legal remedy before the courts
- Any order suspending Internet services should provide the legal basis on which it was issued
- The principle of proportionality must be followed, meaning government cannot issue indiscriminate shutdown orders
- Internet shutdowns must not extend beyond the “necessary duration”
- A review committee must assess the legality of Internet suspension orders within “seven working days of the previous review”
The case revolved around Internet and travel constraints enforced in the then-state of Jammu and Kashmir on 4 August 2019 on grounds of “national security” and “public order”.
The Supreme Court did not rescind the Internet restrictions. Instead, it asked the union government to reassess the shutdown orders based on the criteria mentioned in its judgment.
Using Technicalities To Disobey
Despite the Supreme Court’s guidelines restricting internet shutdowns, emphasising the principles of “proportionality” and “necessity”, state and union governments have, as we said, freely violated these orders.
For instance, less than a month after the Supreme Court order in Anuradha Bhasin, the union government shutdown the Internet during the farmers protests of 2021.
States continue to illegally suspend telecom and internet services by, often, not issuing formal internet orders, publicising or publishing them or reviewing these orders at regular intervals, as they are required to.
“We see repeated violations of the Anuradha Bhasin judgment where orders are not published or review committees are not set up,” said Mishi Choudhary, a technology lawyer and founder of sflc. In. “States are finding every technicality to avoid restoration of communications.”
Some states shut down the Internet citing powers under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, and have not created a review committee under the telecom suspension rules of 2017. Section 144 of the CrPC allows district magistrates to issue a variety of orders in case of “urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger”.
The Supreme Court said section 144 “cannot be used to suppress legitimate expression of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic rights”. It ordered governments to “review forthwith the need for continuance of any existing orders” under this section of the law.
While amending the telecom suspension rules in 2017, the union government said the Internet could not be suspended for more than 15 days. Yet, either it or state governments often issue new orders before that period ends, so they effectively circumvent the rule, said experts.
Governments justify these blanket shutdowns by often saying they are meant to prevent misinformation, paper leaks, and violence. Experts disagreed, arguing that "fake news," "misinformation," or "rumor-mongering" as grounds for suspension almost never justify the ends.
Shruti Narayan, Asia Pacific policy fellow at Access Now, said the Manipur experience was a prime example of violence and disinformation continuing despite record shutdowns.
“Rather than combating false information, these shutdowns might worsen and magnify the spread of damaging content by denying individuals the means to verify and fact-check,” said Gayatri Malhotra, an associate litigation counsel with the Internet Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group.
“Essentially, Internet shutdowns empower the state to become the predominant authority on information, rendering essential fact-checking tools inaccessible,” said Malhotra.
Consequently, said experts, the State assumes the role of truth arbiter, allowing carefully curated information, distorted data, and propaganda to circulate unchecked.
How 6 States Ignored The Supreme Court
Here are six violations of the Supreme Court’s Internet-shutdown violations:
Manipur: The state’s 5,000-hour Internet shutdown in 2023 clearly violated the Supreme Court’s order, said experts.
“SC in its Anuradha Bhasin says no indefinite orders will be passed, the review committee is to meet every seven days but what if orders are extended every five days as in the case of Manipur?” said Choudhary of sflc.in.
Manipur did not publish shutdown orders on its website, as it was meant to, until 6 November 2023, until a petition was filed before the Manipur High Court.
“Even then It took several months before the court directed the government to publish/upload the orders,” said Narayan of Access Now. “Not publishing these orders is an ingenious way of evading accountability, and that’s how the government can prevent any judicial scrutiny and overview from the review committee.
" Internet shutdown was necessitated by the fact that rumors and fake news were peddled through Internet-enabled [social] media,” said a Manipur government official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “These rumours or fake news are highly capable of worsening the already volatile law and order situation.”
“Yes, the economy was hit hard,” said the official. “But, maintaining law and order was crucial during such a period."
Meghalaya: On 15 August 2021, the state shutdown the Internet without publishing orders of the shutdown online on its website, as the Supreme Court ordered. That did not happen even after, when persistent civil unrest led to similar shutdowns in four districts
In September 2020, the IFF urged the Meghalaya government to make public its Internet shutdown orders. In September 2020, eight months after the Supreme Court’s order, the IFF submitted right-to-information (RTI) requests to four state governments and the union government to see if they had obeyed the Anuradha Bhasin judgment.
"No,” replied Meghalaya to the RTI request. “The State Government is not aware of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision, since the same was not received by the State Government.”
Jammu & Kashmir: On 21 May 2021, the govt of J&K shut down the Internet three times without publicly disclosing why and, in so doing, ignoring Supreme Court orders: On 4 May in Sopore, Baramulla district, on 6 May in Shopian district and on 17 May in Pulwama district.
“The Government of J&K has not published the orders of IGP and the Review Committee,” said the IFF. “Moreover, orders of the Principal Secretary of the Government of J&K confirming the orders of IGP were only belatedly published sometime in June 2021.”
West Bengal: On 31 March 2023, the district magistrate in Howrah district ordered the suspension of Internet services for a day, citing section 144 of the CrPc instead of following the telecom suspension rules.
In Anuradha Bhasin, the Supreme Court said states were exploiting and ignoring these rules in suspending the Internet. In a letter to the Howrah district magistrate in March 2023, the IFF expressed displeasure that section 144 was used to suspend Internet services instead of the telecom suspension rules.
Rajasthan: The state’s committee to review suspension orders within five days of issue did not do so, by its own acknowledgement.
In response to an RTI Application filed by IFF on 12 February 2022, the Rajasthan government admitted that its review committee did not review Internet shutdown orders, only received and approved them, a violation of the the telecom suspension rules.
Rajasthan has often shutdown the Internet (here, here and here) to stop “copying gangs”, “leaks” and “law-and-order” situations during examinations. Sflc.in identified about 25 government documents ordering Internet shutdowns before exams in the state between 2018 and 2021, when the Congress party governed the state.
For instance, between 2018 and 2021, the divisional commissioner of Jaipur expressed concerns about groups involved in "active exam solving or copying”.
“These are not legally valid reasons to impose a shutdown, ever,” said Narayan of Access Now.
“You don’t have to have a shutdown to prevent paper leaks in examinations,” said Narayan. “An Internet shutdown is a completely disproportionate response to cheating during exams [and] does not satisfy any of the grounds for restricting free speech under the Constitution.”
R C Choudary, spokesperson of the Congress party in Rajasthan, said his government shut down the Internet for a variety of reasons.
“To prevent cheating isn’t the only reasons for the shutdown, obviously,” said Choudhary. “There have been shutdowns to prevent the spread of disinformation, rumours and communal harmony.”
These reasons, experts said, did not fulfil the definition of a proportionate response.
The Courts Can Step In
India’s courts have done very little about violations to the telecom suspension rules and Supreme Court orders. That, said experts, is a reason why the violations continue.
Two judgments, in Marcy 2022 from the Calcutta High Court and in September 2023 from the Jharkhand High Court, pointed to such violations and censured governments..
“The respondents should have notified the orders suspending the internet services in their website at [an] appropriate time as per the directions given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anuradha Bhasin versus Union of India,” said the Jharkhand High Court.
Citing the Calcutta High Court judgement, Narayan said it was “challenging” to petition courts in time to stop a shutdown, even though courts had the power to review shutdown orders.
The Calcutta High Court said the authority that issued the suspension order, which did not say why the Internet needed to be suspended, was not empowered to do so using section 144 of the CrPc.
In November 2023, the Manipur High Court said all orders had to be published, following which they were.
"The State of Manipur is directed to upload on its official website, i.e., www.manipur.gov.in, a copy of all the orders issued in relation to suspension/curbing of mobile internet/data services, internet/data services through VPN in the State of Manipur, expeditiously,” the high court.
Correction: An earlier version of this story said the Internet had been shutdown 428 times over the last three years in Jammu and Kashmir, followed by Rajasthan (99), Manipur (44) and Uttar Pradesh (33). These figures relate to outages over the last nine years, not three. We regret the error.
(Samriddhi Sakunia is an independent journalist based in New Delhi. She covers hate-crime and technology.)
Get exclusive access to new databases, expert analyses, weekly newsletters, book excerpts and new ideas on democracy, law and society in India. Subscribe to Article 14.