For the government, the situation is more complicated. On the one hand, it has to deal with the situation of public outrage and outcry from different corners for the banning of the video. In the event, the ministry of information and broadcasting acted firmly and took to task the two channels which aired the footage despite their prompt action and apologies. The Department of Information Technology (DIT), for its part, chose to get in touch with both Gautam Prasad and Youtube, instead of blocking the website in the first place — which it could have easily done. This was a sensible step, considering the fact that it is difficult for ISPs to censor portions of a website. In any case, there would have been a huge hue and cry from the online community if Youtube was blocked. However, DIT is now taking too long and for that matter so also are the other government officials who are capable of making a representation to CERT-in for the blocking of the website, given the laggard response from Google. Its industry friendly stance could also be challenged in the courts, considering the fact that the video’s contents involved a figure as revered as Mahatma Gandhi.

No doubt the issue is a relatively new one and there are few precedents. India is still grappling with the complex implications of cyberspace. However, such issues also demand a timely response and such a response must be based on the concept of a ‘balanced flow of information’. This is evident in the Government of India Gazette notification of February 2003, where steps for blocking of websites are well laid down. Even Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000, is reasonable enough to give powers to the Controller of Certifying Authority to intercept unlawful communications in cyberspace. Similarly, the role of Google could also be examined under the provisions of Section 79, which puts the onus on the intermediary for third party content. In short, options are there in plenty and they deserve to be carefully studied.

... contd.