 |
|
The recent report highlighting India's position as having the second-highest number of internet shutdowns globally in 2024, only surpassed by Myanmar, raises serious concerns about the state of digital freedom and expression within the world's largest democracy. This marks the first time since 2018 that India has not topped the list, a dubious distinction it has consistently held, indicating a concerning trend of government-imposed internet restrictions. While the slight decrease in shutdowns compared to previous years might appear to be a positive sign on the surface, the sheer volume of these disruptions, totaling 84 incidents in 2024 alone, is alarming. The report from Access Now underscores the detrimental impact these shutdowns have on various aspects of society, ranging from hindering access to information and essential services to stifling political dissent and economic activity. It also reveals a concerning trend: the increase in election-related shutdowns. These disruptions, documented across eight countries, undermine the integrity of democratic processes and prevent citizens from accessing crucial information and participating fully in electoral activities. The fact that 'the year of democracy' coincided with the highest number of poll-related shutdowns since 2019 is a significant cause for concern, highlighting the potential for governments to weaponize internet restrictions as a tool for political control. Examining the specific regions affected by internet shutdowns within India reveals further complexities and nuances. The state of Manipur, plagued by ethnic strife and social unrest, experienced the highest number of blackouts, highlighting the correlation between conflict zones and government-imposed internet restrictions. The rationale often cited by authorities for these shutdowns is the preservation of public order and the prevention of the spread of misinformation or incitement to violence. However, critics argue that these broad justifications are often used as a pretext to suppress dissent, limit the flow of information, and shield government actions from public scrutiny. The impact of internet shutdowns extends far beyond mere inconvenience. Businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises that rely heavily on online platforms for their operations, suffer significant economic losses. Access to essential services, such as healthcare and education, is severely hampered, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the lack of access to information can exacerbate existing inequalities and create an environment of fear and uncertainty, particularly in areas already facing conflict or instability. The report also highlights the concerning trend of governments targeting specific social media platforms. X, formerly Twitter, emerged as the most blocked platform worldwide in 2024, facing 24 blocks across 14 countries. This deliberate targeting of platforms used for communication, information sharing, and political mobilization raises questions about the motives behind these restrictions and their potential to stifle freedom of expression and online activism. The increasing censorship of TikTok, another popular social media platform, further underscores the growing trend of governments seeking to control and manipulate online narratives. The continued bans imposed by India, Jordan, and Kyrgyzstan into 2025 demonstrate the long-term implications of these restrictions and the challenges in reversing them. Addressing the issue of internet shutdowns requires a multi-faceted approach that involves collaboration between governments, civil society organizations, technology companies, and international bodies. Governments need to adopt transparent and accountable processes for imposing internet restrictions, ensuring that they are only used as a last resort and are proportionate to the threat they are intended to address. Independent oversight mechanisms are crucial to prevent abuse and ensure that shutdowns are not used to silence dissent or suppress legitimate forms of expression. Civil society organizations play a vital role in monitoring and documenting internet shutdowns, advocating for policy reforms, and providing legal support to those affected by these restrictions. Technology companies have a responsibility to uphold human rights principles and resist government demands that violate freedom of expression and access to information. They should also explore technical solutions to circumvent shutdowns and ensure that users can continue to access information and communicate online. International bodies, such as the United Nations, can play a crucial role in setting international standards for internet freedom and promoting best practices for responsible internet governance. They can also provide technical assistance to countries seeking to strengthen their legal and regulatory frameworks and promote digital literacy and awareness. Ultimately, addressing the issue of internet shutdowns requires a fundamental shift in mindset, recognizing that access to the internet is not merely a luxury but a fundamental human right that is essential for participation in the modern world. Governments should prioritize policies that promote digital inclusion and empower citizens to access information, express themselves freely, and participate fully in democratic processes. The continued prevalence of internet shutdowns in India and other countries serves as a stark reminder of the challenges that lie ahead in safeguarding digital freedom and ensuring that the internet remains a tool for empowerment, not oppression. The implications of these shutdowns go beyond the immediate disruption of services; they erode trust in government, stifle economic growth, and undermine democratic values.
The implications of India's high ranking in internet shutdowns extend far beyond immediate disruptions to online access. They represent a deeper systemic issue related to governance, freedom of expression, and the balance between national security concerns and individual liberties. The frequent use of internet shutdowns as a response to protests, communal violence, or even anticipated unrest raises questions about the efficacy and proportionality of such measures. While the stated intention is often to prevent the spread of misinformation or incitement to violence, critics argue that shutdowns often serve to suppress dissent, limit access to crucial information, and shield government actions from public scrutiny. The economic impact of these shutdowns is also significant. In an increasingly digital economy, businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), rely heavily on internet connectivity for their operations. When internet access is disrupted, these businesses suffer financial losses, hindering economic growth and development. Moreover, the lack of access to information can exacerbate existing inequalities, particularly in areas already facing socio-economic challenges. For instance, during periods of communal violence, internet shutdowns can prevent communities from accessing vital information about safety, resources, and assistance, making them more vulnerable. The reliance on blanket shutdowns also raises concerns about their effectiveness in achieving their stated goals. While shutdowns may temporarily disrupt communication channels, they also drive individuals and groups to find alternative means of communication, often through less transparent and more difficult-to-monitor channels. This can make it harder for authorities to track potential threats and counter misinformation, potentially undermining the very objectives of the shutdown. A more nuanced and targeted approach, focusing on addressing the root causes of unrest and promoting responsible online behavior, may be more effective in the long run. Furthermore, the increasing trend of election-related internet shutdowns is particularly alarming. In the age of digital campaigning and online political discourse, access to the internet is crucial for ensuring free and fair elections. Shutdowns during election periods can disenfranchise voters, prevent them from accessing information about candidates and policies, and undermine the integrity of the electoral process. The fact that 2024, a year with elections in numerous countries, saw the highest number of election-related shutdowns since 2019 is a cause for serious concern. The report's findings regarding the targeting of specific social media platforms, such as X and TikTok, also highlight the growing trend of government censorship and control over online content. While governments may argue that they are taking action against hate speech or misinformation, critics argue that such measures can be used to silence dissenting voices and suppress political opposition. The lack of transparency and accountability in these processes further exacerbates these concerns. Addressing the issue of internet shutdowns requires a multi-faceted approach that involves governments, civil society organizations, technology companies, and international bodies. Governments need to adopt clear and transparent legal frameworks that define the circumstances under which internet shutdowns can be justified, ensuring that they are proportionate to the threat they are intended to address and subject to independent oversight. Civil society organizations play a crucial role in monitoring and documenting internet shutdowns, advocating for policy reforms, and providing legal support to those affected by these restrictions. Technology companies have a responsibility to respect human rights and resist government demands that violate freedom of expression and access to information. International bodies, such as the United Nations, can play a role in setting international standards for internet freedom and promoting best practices for responsible internet governance. The continued prevalence of internet shutdowns in India and other countries underscores the urgent need for a global effort to promote digital rights and ensure that the internet remains a tool for empowerment and freedom, rather than a tool for censorship and control.
The geographic distribution of internet shutdowns within India, as highlighted in the report, further illuminates the complex factors driving these restrictions. The state of Manipur, which experienced the highest number of internet blackouts, has been grappling with prolonged ethnic strife and social unrest. In such volatile contexts, authorities often resort to internet shutdowns as a means of controlling the flow of information, preventing the spread of rumors, and maintaining public order. However, critics argue that these measures can also exacerbate tensions by isolating communities, limiting access to essential services, and hindering communication between families and friends. The reliance on internet shutdowns in conflict-affected areas raises questions about the effectiveness of such measures in addressing the underlying causes of unrest. While shutdowns may temporarily suppress communication, they do not address the root issues that fuel conflict and instability. A more sustainable approach would involve addressing grievances, promoting dialogue, and fostering reconciliation among communities. Furthermore, the use of internet shutdowns in areas like Jammu and Kashmir, which has a long history of political instability and security concerns, highlights the challenges of balancing national security interests with the protection of digital rights. While governments have a legitimate responsibility to protect their citizens and maintain public order, the use of blanket internet shutdowns can have unintended consequences, such as stifling economic activity, hindering access to education and healthcare, and alienating local populations. A more targeted and nuanced approach, focusing on addressing specific threats and promoting responsible online behavior, may be more effective in the long run. The report's findings regarding the targeting of specific social media platforms also raise concerns about the increasing trend of government censorship and control over online content. The fact that X, formerly Twitter, emerged as the most blocked platform worldwide in 2024, facing 24 blocks across 14 countries, highlights the growing pressure on social media companies to comply with government demands for content removal and account suspension. While governments may argue that they are taking action against hate speech or misinformation, critics argue that such measures can be used to silence dissenting voices and suppress political opposition. The lack of transparency and accountability in these processes further exacerbates these concerns. The increasing censorship of TikTok, another popular social media platform, also underscores the growing trend of governments seeking to control and manipulate online narratives. The continued bans imposed by India, Jordan, and Kyrgyzstan into 2025 demonstrate the long-term implications of these restrictions and the challenges in reversing them. Addressing the issue of internet shutdowns requires a collaborative effort involving governments, civil society organizations, technology companies, and international bodies. Governments need to adopt clear and transparent legal frameworks that define the circumstances under which internet shutdowns can be justified, ensuring that they are proportionate to the threat they are intended to address and subject to independent oversight. Civil society organizations play a crucial role in monitoring and documenting internet shutdowns, advocating for policy reforms, and providing legal support to those affected by these restrictions. Technology companies have a responsibility to respect human rights and resist government demands that violate freedom of expression and access to information. International bodies, such as the United Nations, can play a role in setting international standards for internet freedom and promoting best practices for responsible internet governance. The continued prevalence of internet shutdowns in India and other countries underscores the urgent need for a global effort to promote digital rights and ensure that the internet remains a tool for empowerment and freedom, rather than a tool for censorship and control. The Indian government, along with other nations struggling with the delicate balance between security and digital freedom, must prioritize open dialogue with civil society, invest in digital literacy initiatives, and develop targeted strategies for managing online content that respect fundamental human rights. Failure to do so risks undermining democratic principles and hindering economic progress in an increasingly interconnected world.
Source: India saw second-highest number of Internet shutdowns in 2024: Report