Re: Evolution of cybercrime laws in Tamil nadu
Banibrata Dutta <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.telecom.india-gii |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALODqpr+B6P628rRHCZ5Y9ZT1zAwHcW4g3AwMViV75+v=YUFNw@mail.gmail.com> |
Karnataka has had a similar good fortune... let's join in the celebration :-) http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-07-30/news/52237723_1_goonda-act-offences-offenders On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]> wrote: > Summary: > > Cybercrime offenders to be treated on par with hardened > criminals and sex offenders, and can face up to a year of preventive > detention in the state of Tamil Nadu. > > There have been previous attempts to do this in TN, > > http://www.ndtv.com/article/south/tamil-nadu-to-bring-cyber-crime-under-goondas-act-307528 > > The latest is this: > > > http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/amendments-will-be-violative-of-article-21-22-experts/article6306765.ece > > "More significantly, the Bill also proposes to bring under the Goondas > Act the offences listed in Chapter XI of the Information Technology > Act. This includes Section 66(A) that prohibits “offensive messages > through communication service.” > > In recent times, a number of persons have been booked under this > Section in many parts of the country for posting “offensive” messages > on social media sites attracting outrage from rights activists. > > In fact, moving one step further, the amendments in the Bill make even > “preparations” for engaging in a cyber crime an offence if it had the > potential to affect public order. > > “By bringing within its ambit those persons who are preparing to > engage in the commission of a cyber-law offence, the police will be > authorised to detain individuals who simply visit a website that > carries derogatory material that, if disseminated, will endanger > public order. Such a provision is hardly reasonable and is > constitutionally suspect,” feels Abhishek Sudhir, Assistant Director > of the Centre for Public Law and Jurisprudence at the Jindal Global > Law School. “Such a provision is violative of Article 21 of the > Constitution [which protects right of life and personal liberty].” > > As on April 7, Tamil Nadu had 1851 persons detained under the TPDA." > > Other reasons to be concerned, besides cybercrime: > > http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/activists-fear-misuse-of-law/article6307809.ece?homepage=true > > _______________________________________________ > India-gii mailing list > India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected] > https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii > -- regards, Banibrata http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta http://twitter.com/edgeliving _______________________________________________ India-gii mailing list India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected] https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii