Internet Access is a Fundamental Right for Children, Rules Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: In a landmark observation that redefines the digital landscape for the youth of India, the Supreme Court has declared that access to the internet is a fundamental right, extending this protection to children as well. A bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Chandran ruled that the ability to connect to the digital world is inextricably linked to the right to life and liberty under Article 21, as well as the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Rejecting Blanket Bans

The top court addressed the growing global debate regarding the restriction of children’s access to social media and digital platforms. While acknowledging concerns about online safety, the court firmly rejected the implementation of blanket bans on internet usage for minors.

The bench observed that such restrictive measures are often disproportionate and ineffective. The justices noted that prohibiting children from accessing the internet by law does not stop them from using it; instead, it often drives them toward unregulated and significantly more dangerous corners of the web. Citing the lack of empirical evidence from other countries where such bans have been imposed, the court described these measures as “unproven” and insufficient in guaranteeing actual safety.

A Priceless Resource

Highlighting the essential nature of modern connectivity, the court remarked that the internet is “priceless,” particularly for children residing in remote or underprivileged areas. For many, it serves as the primary, and often sole, gateway to education, information, and personal development.

“Our children, irrespective of their age, enjoy the same rights,” the bench stated, emphasizing that denying this access would be as illogical as suggesting that children do not possess a conscience worth protecting or a voice worth hearing. The court asserted that blanket prohibitions fail to respect the intellectual and developmental autonomy of young individuals.

Protecting Against Harmful Content

While the Supreme Court pushed back against sweeping restrictions, it did not advocate for a digital “wild west.” Instead, the judiciary underscored the necessity of targeted safeguards. The court explicitly favored restricting access to content that is inherently dangerous or sexually exploitative, maintaining that while the right to the internet is fundamental, the environment must be managed to ensure child protection.

The ruling came in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO ‘Just Rights for Children Alliance.’ The petition brought to the court’s attention the persistent failure of intermediaries to effectively combat the proliferation of child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM). The apex court expressed its dissatisfaction with the slow pace of progress over the last two years, noting that despite previous directives, substantial efforts by digital platforms to address these grave issues remain lacking.

Moving forward, the judiciary’s stance signals a balancing act: acknowledging the internet as a vital democratic space for the next generation, while simultaneously holding tech intermediaries accountable for implementing sophisticated, age-appropriate safety mechanisms rather than relying on ineffective, broad-brush bans.

Disclaimer: This content is auto-generated for informational purposes only.

Source: Read Original News