| Headnote |
Constitution of India – Articles 194, 105 and 19(1)(a), (2) – Online hate speech content – Social media platforms – Accountability of – Parliamentary Privilege/ Privilege of Legislature – In the wake of Delhi riots, Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi constituted a Committee on Peace and Harmony – Summons issued to Managing Director of Facebook India, to appear before it – Challenge to – Impugned summons withdrawn, new summons issued – Held: There is no dispute about the right of the Assembly or the Committee to proceed on grounds of breach of privilege per se – Power to compel attendance by initiating privilege proceedings is an essential power – Members and non-Members (like the petitioners) can equally be directed to appear before the Committee and depose on oath – Petitioners, more so with their expanded role as an intermediary, can hardly contend that they have some exceptional privilege to abstain from appearing before a committee duly constituted by the Assembly – However, on facts, only a summons has been issued for appearance before the Committee – Issue of privileges is premature – The question of any privilege power being exercised is yet far away – Plea raised on the exercise of privilege is a pre-emptive strike – Complete plea of the petitioners is premature as nothing has really happened other than them having been asked to appear before the Committee – Facebook cannot excuse themselves from appearing pursuant to the New Summons issued – Information Technology Act, 2000 – s.69A – Government of National Capital Territory Act, 1991. Information Technology Act, 2000 – Online hate speech content on social media platforms – Role, accountability of such platforms – Plea of Facebook that it is merely a platform posting third party information and has no role in generating, controlling or modulating that information – Held: Not accepted – These platforms are by no means altruistic in character but rather employ business models that can be highly privacy intrusive and have the potential to polarize public debates – Further, business model of intermediaries like the petitioner being one across countries, they cannot be permitted to take contradictory stands in different jurisdictions. Constitution of India – Seventh Schedule, List II, Entries 1, 2 & 18 – Committee on Peace and Harmony constituted by Delhi Legislative Assembly in the wake of Delhi riots – Validity of – Held: The Assembly is no different from any other State assembly, except to the extent that certain powers in List II of the Seventh Schedule have not been conferred (i.e., Entries 1, 2 & 18) – Assembly admittedly does not have any power to legislate on aspects of law and order and police in view of Entries 1 and 2 of List II in the Seventh Schedule inter alia being excluded – Assembly does not only perform the function of legislating; there are many other aspects of governance which can form part of the essential functions of the Legislative Assembly and consequently the Committee – Committee can trace its legitimacy to several Entries in List II and List III without encroaching upon the excluded fields of public order or police to undertake a concerted effort albeit not to the extent as canvassed – In the larger context, the concept of peace and harmony goes much beyond law and order and police, more so in view of on the-ground governance being in the hands of the Delhi Government. Constitution of India – Articles 194, 105 – Functions performed by an elected Parliament or Assembly not confined to only enacting laws – Role of Committees constituted by legislative bodies in the functioning and the working of the Houses Held: Unless the committee embarks on a course completely devoid of its functional mandate specified by the Assembly, or the Assembly itself lacks jurisdiction to deal with the subject matter, the widest amplitude must be given to the functioning of these committees – The inquisitorial role of the committee in the functioning of House is of great significance, and as recognized, the investigation of a complicated social problem prior to legislation often rests frequently on such legislative committees – Intelligent legislative action and deliberation thereon rests on the power to investigate into questions of public importance and, thus, issuance of summons is key to this investigative exercise. Constitution of India – Articles 194, 105; Seventh Schedule, List II, Entries 1 and 2 – Para 4(vii) of the Terms of Reference tasked the Committee with recommending action against such persons against whom incriminating evidence is found – Held: In order to justify the legislative competence and the remit of the Committee, the respondents have practically given up this para – It does not survive for any opinion of the Committee – Further, it will not be permissible for the Committee to encroach upon any aspects strictly within the domain of Entries 1 and 2 of List II of the Seventh Schedule – As such, any representative of the petitioners would have the right to not answer questions directly covered by these two fields. Constitution of India – Part III – Issue of privileges vis-à-vis the right of free speech, silence, and privacy – Held: Larger issue of privileges vis-à-vis the right of free speech, silence, and privacy in the context of Part III of the Constitution is still at large in view of the reference to the larger Bench in N. Ravi v. Legislative Assembly reported as (2005) 1 SCC 603. |
