Question

Principle 1: Indian Constitution provides for freedom of speech and expression to all of its citizens.
Principle 2: The freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions like public order, etc.
Fact: At the time of the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution, which denounced Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood, the Central Government restricted Internet services in the region mentioned in its order. In certain regions, it reduced the speed from 4G to 2G. These orders were passed by the Central Government from time to time in light of the rumoured being spread about civilian encounter killings to prevent any untoward law and order situation from happening in the region and to quell the spread of fake news.
Choose the correct option.

• A. This is a reasonable restriction of the freedom of speech and such action of the Central Government can be justified on the grounds of internal security.
• B. This is an unreasonable restriction on the ground that the right to the Internet is a fundamental right.
• C. This is an unreasonable restriction as it affects day-to-day activities and e-commerce activities of the residents.
• D. This is a reasonable restriction but the act of the Central Government cannot be justified.

Hint:

Reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) allow the State to balance individual freedoms with public order and national security.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Understanding the constitutional principles.
Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all citizens. However, Article 19(2) permits the State to impose reasonable restrictions on this freedom in the interests of public order, security of the State, and internal security.
Step 2: Analyzing the factual situation.
The Central Government restricted Internet services in Jammu and Kashmir during the abrogation of Article 370 due to concerns regarding the spread of rumours, fake news, and potential law and order disturbances. The reduction of Internet speed was a preventive measure aimed at maintaining public order.
Step 3: Application of reasonable restrictions.
The restriction was not a complete denial of freedom of speech but a temporary and proportionate limitation imposed to safeguard internal security and prevent violence. Such restrictions fall within the permissible limits under Article 19(2).
Step 4: Elimination of incorrect options.
(B) is incorrect because the right to Internet access is not an absolute fundamental right.
(C) is incorrect as inconvenience to daily activities does not override national security concerns.
(D) is incorrect because once a restriction is reasonable, it is legally justifiable.
Step 5: Conclusion.
Since the restriction was imposed to maintain public order and internal security, it qualifies as a reasonable restriction under the Constitution. Hence, option (A) is correct.