According to the key provisions of the amendment to the Kerala Police Act 2011
* Anyone who creates or sends an offensive message or is intended to offend or threaten another person, through any means of communication, can face a prison sentence of five years or a fine of Rs 10,000 or both.
* The police can impose criminal charges on citizens by interpreting any type of communication through any medium as defamatory.
* He considers even “mental injury” to be a reason to bring criminal charges not only at the request of the victim, but also against anyone “in whom they have an interest” or as a suo motu act of a police officer.
Despite CM guarantees, 118A is a direct attack on Freedom of Expression (FOE). On the one hand, it criminalizes any “matter” that is “abusive, humiliating, or defamatory,” which is perfectly fine, but it also targets speech that is “threatening,” a more ambiguous term open to subjective interpretation at best. cases. Given that, in this case, it is the police who will be judge, jury and executioner, it becomes doubly worrisome. That the state government is looking beyond protecting women and children from online predators was obvious when the CM said that no one should worry, except of course those who do not practice impartial journalism. Now, what is ‘impartial’ and ‘who’ decides what is impartial? With the LDF government on the defensive for alleged scams and other abuses, and the facts still in dispute, ‘non-impartial’ becomes a convenient label to target those who do not follow the party line. The old Stalinist reflection of “those who are not with us are against us” resurfaces, while FSO is conveniently seen as an attribute of an “enemy”. In short, these are tense issues, which is why even certified left-wing liberals have opposed 118A. The LDF government will do well to heed your opinion on this matter.
Path taken by ordinance
* The state cabinet decided on October 21 to recommend to the governor the enactment of the ordinance, to which Governor Arif Mohammed Khan gave his consent on Saturday.
Why is it controversial?
* The amendment has extended the law to such an extent that each communication or publication has been left to the subjective interpretation of the police to impose criminal charges against anyone.
* The move comes on the heels of the government’s failed efforts to control narrative in the media, especially on social media, in the wake of discussions of ongoing investigations by central agencies in the state.
.
