PANAJI
In recent times, the role of social media in shaping public opinion and its intersection with legal processes has sparked a major debate among legal experts. Senior legal counsels have cited a growing concern wherein social media platforms are increasingly being used to defame and settle personal scores rather than serving as a space for constructive dialogue.
A senior high court lawyer claimed that misuse of these platforms not only distorts public perception but also complicates the legal recourse available to the aggrieved parties.
“Rather than approaching courts for respite or relief, people are opting to air grievances on social media. This trend is alarming as it bypasses the judicial system, especially when in most cases accusations go unchecked and reputational damages can spread rapidly without verification,” he said, wishing anonymity.
The lawyer also questioned why “take down” suits are being adopted against the errant content creators while also strongly advocating the need to block them on these platforms.
On the contrary, former Advocate General Saresh Lotlikar has a different perspective opining that many social media controversies are trivial and should be ignored unless they pose a clear and present danger, such as inciting criminal activity or terrorism.
“Influencers or social media users (trying to get maximum reach) achieve it (by getting media attention). Their (controversial) statements are timed in the manner it garners attention. It should actually be ignored... Moreover, social media is affecting the judiciary because ultimately the person who incited controversy is gaining undue publicity,” he argued.
Adding another layer to the discussion, Adv Cleofato Coutinho criticized the intervention of law enforcement in social media disputes unless a clear offense is committed. He also expressed concern over the rise of “pre-trial arrests” where persons are detained based on public or mob pressure rather than legal merit.
“Though I always disagree with the way of misuse of social media, the police have no business to intervene unless a clear offense is made out. Pre-trial arrest has become a punishment in our country where mobs decide who has to be arrested. Troll armies and mobs with government backing is a recipe for a totalitarian state,” he said.
The constitutional expert further suggested the country requires an arrest and a bail code to prevent the misuse of arrest provisions. “To arrest somebody because a mob demands it is mobocracy. The Information Technology Act could be strengthened to have a speedy trial with designated courts with time-bound prosecution like one month,” he added.
Yet another legal expert claimed that the unregulated nature of social media can indeed undermine the legal process and personal reputations, making it a double-edged sword that can either support transparency and accountability or propagate misinformation and chaos.
Asked whether action is needed unless a post poses a serious security threat, Coutinho slammed that authorities have been partisan in usage of their powers leading to suppression of dissent.
Advocate Galileo Teles informed that with the introduction of the Information Technology (intermediary guidelines and digital media ethics code) Rules, 2021, there is further reinforcement to the grievances redressal mechanism by imposing certain due diligence obligations on the social media platforms including Facebook, etc.
“These social media platforms/intermediaries have an obligation to ensure its platforms are not misused by individuals to put up defamatory, obscene, objectionable posts which violate any laws under the force. Under the rules, a grievance officer should be posted to acknowledge the complaint within 24 hours and dispose of the same within 15 days… The intermediary can pull down the objectionable posts after verifying the complaint,” he said.
