Towards a wonderful informative network.............. but how safely?

http://www.cybervictims.org

For the last full month while India was swept over by Modi vs Rahul vs Kejriwals for the general election, I was over swept by the joy of getting published in British Journal of Criminology. The article “Online Victimization of Andaman Jarawa Tribal Women: An Analysis of the ‘Human Safari’ YouTube Videos (2012) and Its Effects”  (the online version can be found @ http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/05/05/bjc.azu026.abstract?keytype=ref&ijkey=3XNPIViieFGse4G ) has been published in one of the most coveted journals that any researcher can ask for. While researching for this I came to realise the new born habit of people: sharing controversial images and adding their thoughts to it. It can become extremely dangerous at times and the above article speaks on this.

There had been numbers of online propagandas on who is good, who has done the right things, who is bad and how he/she is bad in the course of election campaigns this year. Numerous cartoon images were made, animated short films were made and people were asked to share and comment.  Some were noted by the respective political parties and the election commissionarate, majority of them went unnoticed. I found a new era in ‘free speech’ concept in India and I felt happy to note the liberal mindset of the people, especially the political campaigners to broaden the concept of free speech notion. But of course, there is other side of the coin as well. The recent arrest of  the Goan resident for expressing some thoughts on Prime Minister elect Narendra Modi is an example (See http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/goan-youth-likely-to-face-arrest-for-anti-modi-facebook-comments/) . As the press release says, among the provisions brought in against the accused, S.153(A) of the IPC holds the key to make it a snow ball of problems. The Section prohibits causing enmity between groups on grounds of race, religion, place of birth, language etc. What was written by the youth that attracted such provisions is not known to us to still now. But it may be understood that while it was noticed by some as ‘offensive’, some have also pointed this arrest as wrong. It now depends upon the courts to decide whether the ‘post’ should be given the ‘protected speech’ status by overruling the lower courts who had denied anticipatory bail to the youth. In our article above one of my main focus was on showcasing how racial trolling took place in the YouTube videos and how the Jarawa women were made the centre points of these trolling. As far as my knowledge goes, no one was arrested for making comments some of which had every condition to attract the above provision. It was because the question of cross border jurisdiction was involved and the perceptions hugely differed. But nonetheless, I must say creating such comments in the cyber /digital space and spreading it through numerous people (who spread it because they liked the message/their friend, friend’s friend, or distant acquaintance has posted it ) had created riots in India; remember the recent exodus of north-eastern people from southern states? Or, the one image of a man kicking the Kargil memorial which became viral and caused violence?  I am anxiously waiting for more news on the Goan case with my fingers crossed. Let us hope India’s notion about offensive speech is made more clear by the courts.

Keep peace

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2011), “Towards a wonderful network.............. but how safely

”, 25^th May,2014, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Death penalty debates: a note to the supporters

http://www.cybervictims.org

Since the news of execution of death sentence of Afzal Guru, one of the prime accused of Indian Parliament attack case came out, India as well as the world seems to be divided into two groups: one who is saying no to death penalties, and the other who is saying yes to the death penalties. Unfortunately India is witnessing a killing spree which has become almost viral right from 16^th December,2012 when the Delhi gang rape victim was brutally raped. The 23 year old young woman was raped, stripped off and thrown out of the bus where she was raped. Huge numbers of protesters showed their protest against this cruel torture on the woman by saying yes to the death penalty. Internet was swept by such ‘demands’. One experienced woman journalist of a national news channel shared with me personally  her fear that from now on all news papers/media channels will show case rape cases and their handling by the government agencies. She sadly told me that most media houses will go ahead with such news mainly to grow their TRP rates, but at the same time she feared that the result would be devastating. She was true! Anger of people kept on rising whenever there was any news of sexual assault and related death of the victim. The last was none other than the acid attack victim from Chennai who succumbed to death just a few days ago. Unfortunately   there is an extremely dark history in our country which would show that many raped and subsequently dead women victims are extremely neglected by the criminal justice machinery. The Mathura rape case stands as the ugly evidence of abuse and misuse  of power when it comes to providing justice to rape victims such as Mathura. The law has been amended time and again to test the strength of S.376 IPC which prescribes punishment for rape and its series which includes intercourse with a woman misusing the accused person’s designation (even that of a husband  when he involves in intercourse with the wife during  separation ) and its punishment. .While in some cases of brutal rape and then subsequent murder of the victim, the lawyers appearing for the victim (as well as the State) could actually convince the judges to award the death penalty (see Dhananjay Chatterjee Alias Dhana vs State Of W.B. on 11 January, 1994, 1994 (1) ALT Cri 388, 1994 (2) BLJR 1231), with the help of S.302 of the Indian Penal Code, S.376 originally did not prescribe death as the ultimate punishment for violent rape. As it can be seen, India does have death penalty and it is used for rarest of the rare cases. The language of Section 302 of the Indian penal Code prescribes death penalty as the first preference for punishment for murder. The second preference remains life imprisonment which is shown as a substitute to death penalty by adding an  “or” in front of the words “life imprisonment”. The pecuniary punishment of fine comes as an added prescribed punishment  with it. While this provision is a common punishment provision for ‘cold blooded’ murders (which actually excludes culpable homicides not amounting to murder, or cases of causing death by negligence etc), S.121 of the Indian Penal Code also prescribes death penalty as the first preference (again linguistically) and life imprisonment with fine as the second preference for (i) waging war against the government of India, or (ii) attempting to wage such war, or (iii) abetting the waging of such war.  It was not till  the recent Criminal law(amendment )ordinance, 2013 which   mention awarding death penalty for brutal rape which would leave the victim dead or in a vegetative condition(see s.376A of the Indian penal code of the Criminal law (amendment ) ordinance,2013, published on 4^th February,2013 in the Press Information Bureau of India, available @http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=91979) that death penalty was accepted as the extreme punishment for rape of such nature. On a personal note, I  actually support inclusion of this penalty as the last option especially for rarest of the rare cases if taken in its true meaning (the framers of the this ordinance has kept the option of ‘death’ as the last option in line, beginning with prison sentence for twenty years as the first option, which may extend for life). The ordinance made a sect of people happy as it carried out the retributive aspect of sentencing violent crimes against women. Apparently this section comprised of people who went for  on-line petitions, debates and write-ups which actually wanted the prime accused of this rape case to be hanged  or chemically castrated.   The  ordinance  simultaneously made another sect of people disappointed as it upheld ‘constitutional murder’. Immediately after the publication of this ordinance, came the ‘shocking news’ of execution of Afzal Guru which was done without any prior publicity. Actually it was highly speculated in the internet especially after the hanging of Ajmal Kasab in 2012. I came across so many cartoon and  images, short notes and write-ups in the Facebook itself and also in the Twitter which indicated that many people wanted to see the terrorists hanged. The on-line debates brewed up on the sentiments of people. Undoubtedly the demands of hanging of  the brutal rapists and dangerous terrorists who have caused bloody death to many found their own ways of convincing ways. Such posts in the social media did not get removed, but it was seen as a plain case of   freedom of speech and expression which expressed anger and frustration over the delayed process of law in seeing the result  of the rape law amendment or parliament attack case or 26/11 case. These  demands of death penalty especially for the gang rape accused got almost viral in the social media. I find the supporting grounds behind this ‘desperateness’ in some of the land mark death penalty verdicts which considered rarest of rare cases to award the penalty such as  in Machchi Singh Vs. The state (1983)3SCC,470 etc.

I sadly observe that this turn of events actually made some people or groups of people obsessive with death penalties. Many are attacking activists who are against death penalty with harsh and extremely humiliating words in the web platforms such as Twitter. Such activists, especially women activists are targeted by trolls in very offensive words. It needs to be remembered that  if supporters for death sentence can use their freedom of speech and expression in the social media, supporters against death penalty are no aliens who would be rejected this prime right. This pseudo anger over non supporters is carried out through peculiar ways ; some call these non supporters ‘traitors’, some openly throw challenges to breach the dignity of the person (this especially happens for women activists). While all of these sorts of speeches can actually be booked under S.66A of the Information Technology Act, I am yet to research on how many targeted non-supporters have actually taken this path. But at the same time, I would not be surprised if any of the non supporters is again dragged to the police station for expressing his/her views against death penalty as had happened for the Palghar girls’ case who was arrested for their Facebook remarks against the Mumbai shut down due to the death of veteran political leader BalSaheb Thackeray.   Judicial investigation revealed how the law was misused by political goons who forced the police to book the false case.

But, one serious note for the supporters of death penalty: stop throwing threatening /humiliating words to the non supporters. If they are really “traitors” let the court( and not the police only) decide it. Instead of taking law in your own hands or throwing it aside for the sake of hailing the capital punishment , test the power of  the law to judge whether their ways of protesting the death penalties really attracts the ‘protected speech’ category or not.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2013), “Death penalty debates: a note to the supporters”, 16^thFebruary,2013, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

Law to regulate cyber goons?

http://www.cybervictims.org

One more strong amendment to the law meant for regulating cyber offences and this time I am little sceptical about it. The Tamil Nadu government has decided to incorporate the Goonda’s Act to curb cyber goons. Officially known as Tamil Nadu Prevention of  Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sand offenders, Slum grabbers, and Video pirates Act, 1985, the law is extremely powerful and its arms reach seven categories offenders: bootleggers, drug offenders, goondas, immoral traffic offenders, sand offenders, slum grabbers, and video pirates. Those who research in the area of social sciences including criminology, law and victimology, and those who practise criminal law, may note that in general, the typical offenders in such cases who are first nabbed by the investigating officers are often hired individuals or groups of individuals who work for organised crimes sector. The law definitely is extremely powerful to punish the big heads also. This law, if extended to include offences committed in the cyber space which reports suggest “has the propensity to disturb public order”,(see     http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/tamil-nadu/tn-will-use-goondas-act-to-curb-cyber-crime/article4218006.ece?homepage=true) would actually acknowledge the devastating damaging effect of cyber crimes. As I get from The Hindu, the law would be used to curb “ any repeated cyber crime that involves harassment, intimidation or cheating of innocent people in large scale”.  But the rest of the news report gave an idea that these definitions may be  largely meant for economic crimes and money laundering activities through identity related crimes in the internet. True; phishing, lottery scams, card scams, whatever you call them, people behind these crimes are becoming cyber goons who are no less than those which are already under the scope of the Goonda’s Act. In real life, the hired goondas may often be less educated and become habituated for need of money. Cyber goons who act as key players for phishing scams are well matured than these sects of people. But their ultimate motives remain the same: to earn money by illegal ways. In the Information Technology Act, 2000(amended in 2008), the offences chapter in Chapter XI already have bunch of provisions like sections 65 and 66, which prescribe punishment for unauthorised access to computer and data and modifying the contents and computer related offences, the controversial 66A which prohibits sending offensive messages etc, 66 C which prohibits identity theft and 66D which prohibits impersonation by cheating etc. All most all of them can be used in cases of phishing activities (off course depending upon the nature of the operation) and they prescribe jail terms which may extend to three years, besides monetary fines. To make the crime more severe, several Sections from the Indian penal Code like Sections 417, 419, 420 are also used in some cases. All of these sing in the same tune (with different tones): cheating and illegal monetary benefit.

Apart from these, is the Goonda’s Act needed ?

          I endorse Ratna Kapur’s one statement in her very recent article Rape and the crisis of Indian masculinity (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/rape-and-the-crisis-of-indian-masculinity/article4214267.ece). She says  More law — or calls for the death sentence — are not the answer to what is a deeply ingrained societal problem. True, one more law may not be the answer for ending the problem, but I feel happy to note that the problem which remained “cyber” for so long is gradually becoming “real”. The true scope of the law is yet to be determined. But I expect that it should not be misused by police personnel just for the sake of executing the law. We already have a devastating example of misuse of section 66A and the after effects must be taken as a lesson for all. However, I am still waiting to see whether the law extends its hand to nab cyber eve teasers too.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Law to regulate cyber goons”, 20^th December,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

To speak or not to speak while driving:A confused law ?

http://www.cybervictims.org

Survived Bangalore traffic last evening, I thought of revisiting certain feedbacks from the police regarding the side effects of certain laws. Talking and driving have been proved fatal many times  on  Indian roads. Gone are the days when vehicle owners could be punished for driving while listening to car radios only. Introduction of mobile phones, smart phones, blue tooth etc have ushered in a new era when the lawmakers had to think of prohibiting the driver from focussing his attention to other things like talking while driving.  True, talking while driving can be extremely fatal. Particularly when I see drivers of public vehicles like the buses, trucks or  even auto rickshaws, I feel extremely   uncomfortable. The typical position of placing the mobile phone on his ear and clipping it with a hiked shoulder proposes every possibility of faulty driving and even losing mobile phone from the ‘grip’ if the driver has to cross bumpy roads with equal speed as an F1 driver. Each time I am in the hands of such drivers, I keep on shutting my eyes off and on to avoid viewing any nasty accident (fortunately my fear has still now remained a fear only). But can the law really check this habit of talking while driving?

The recent Motor Vehicle Amendment Bill imposes a hefty punishment for repeated use for cell phones, hand held or hand free device or any gadget which actually aides in communicating while driving. Cell phones, i pods, GPs devices .....all are included in the red book now. The feedback from the police in this regard was particularly noteworthy.  They stated that it would be difficult to prove driver’s guilt under this law. Cudos to the police understanding. How can an officer on duty catch a driver who may be armed with a blue tooth on his ear and asking the passenger for the direction? Why would GPS system be at all installed in the cars? Above all, it needs to be understood that in many cities, and even semi rural places (which are blessed with good transport systems), auto rickshaw drivers are often seen to build up personal network among the residents by exchanging their mobile numbers. Their services are available almost 24/7 and this is possible because drivers receive calls while ‘on job’ and if they are driving other passengers, they instantly contact other fellow drivers to provide service to the ‘customers’. Say it a boon of digital telecommunication era, but this is the hard truth. These drivers may not be financially strong enough to buy hand free sets like the upper middle class or upper class car owners. But their business network remains alive for whatever device they have. Majority of urban and rural population of India is still not properly introduced to GPS system;  “call a cab” is still a spreading concept for many non metro cities and in this situation, the easiest way to call for a transport is relying on the mobile phone number given by the good old auto driver.

Added to this, the law even though can prove extremely good to regulate for  safe driving, poses another question: the driver should not concentrate on communication through electronic devices; what if the passenger does the same? Human beings cannot keep their attention focussed on one thing for long if he/she is surrounded by various communicating elements.  Indulging in communication with the passenger or through the communication device of the passenger which is held by the passenger can also be equally dangerous. Many often wise passengers advise others to keep on communicating with the driver while on a long drive. This is a common method adopted by many to keep the driver awake and to avoid any fatal accident which may be caused due to silent, boring and even strenuous drive hours. The driver’s guilt again becomes a question of burden of proof. As the law suggests, the driver needs to stop driving while attending his phone calls. But what would be the situation when the passengers are equally “disturbing” ? It needs to be remembered that while physical safety like wearing seat belts, using helmets etc are extremely necessary for a safe driving and the law must be punitive if the driver faults in these aspects,  at the same time, checking on the driver’s communication activities during driving needs a very high legal and psychological understanding.

But I cannot stop praising the police officials who pointed out this folly. Keep it up officers. If this is the attitude, misuse of law can be prevented in a far better fashion.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012),” To speak or not to speak while driving:A confused law?”, 13^th December,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Mobile phones : some thoughts about victimisations done through it

http://www.cybervictims.org

In my law school days, I came across with a family who had gone through land line phone stalking for continuously six years. The stalker took pain to find out the name of the registered customer for  the number, the neighboring homes etc by manually scrutinizing the huge public phone directory itself. This incident happened nearly ten years back when stalking by phone was an unknown term   in India. The victim family felt terribly humiliated, but kept the matter to themselves because when they contacted the local police, they were advised to switch to new communication media , the mobile phone. They were told that   mobile phones were better as there were no such easily available public directory. Well….ignorance is no bliss. Mobile phones are vicious devises indeed. I finished my law degree and joined the profession. One day I too owned a brand new mobile phone and felt as secured as the victim-family because I circulated  my number to only chosen few. One fine day I found a charming voice of a caller who randomly pushed the buttons and got my voice to hear. He felt it was the best option to flirt with women. But by then I was so busy with my baby daughter that I preferred to hear to her yelling rather than hearing this mobile romeo. I handed over the phone permanently to my husband and the mobile romeo obviously didn't prefer to hear male voices, neither felt like inquiring about the female voice which suddenly changed into a male voice . 

  But this may not be the case always for every one. There are many ignorant 'first time mobile owners'  like me who use social networking sites as public platforms to announce their “prize numbers”. Resultant they become the prize catch for many predators also. I understand that there are three typical routes to harass women by mobile numbers: 1. leaking the number in one of the numerous adult website and cache the number so that in the search engine this number will appear again and again; 2. leaking it in the social networking sites with detailed name and informations ,so that any one and every one of the 'cyber socialites' can have ‘good time’ with the victim; 3.hacking the mobile network to tap the calls and thereby making life miserable for the victim. We do have laws in India to prevent such data leaking. But I consider them very weak when compared to the laws of US or the UK. Yes, we do not have public directory for mobile phone numbers like what we did have for our land numbers, but there are numerous data available in the cyber space by which the victim can be found out and if the harasser is as desperate as the stalker I mentioned above, such easily available data can work better than public directories. 

But, very few note that the ‘safety pin’ actually remains with us from the beginning and we, the general mobile phone users tend to ignore the need to pin up the hole. The safety pin could be used when filling up the profile for the social networking sites, when emailing with ‘signature’ or even when exchanging mobile phone numbers with virtual friends etc by following some awareness notes such as:not to publish the mobile phone number anywhere, not to circulate it among not so known acquaintances etc .

However, I do note that while filling up the form for BSNL services, we are required to choose whether to go for ‘national do not call registry’ or not. No this does not serve any purpose when you speak about personal data protection for mobile  customers from potential harassers who may go for data mining and leave threatening /annoying messages  ( the objectives of the NDNCR clarifies that ‘message’ means only unsolicited commercial communication (UCC) .See http://ndncregistry.gov.in/ndncregistry/index.jsp?reqtrack=qvwhHPNkiQGNDNpwrlvARvsog) But yes, if seen from a broad perspective, this could to a certain extent prevent messy situations that may result due to cloud computing. However, even though harassments through mobile phones are now being considered as one of the core cyber crimes, more stricter laws (well, we do have I.T Act, 2008 to penalize such communications, but it still needs to be broadened) may be needed to restrict unsolicited data mining.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2010), “Mobile phones : some thoughts about victimisations done through it”, 29th November,  2010, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Death threats in the Information Super Highway

http://www.cybervictims.org

After communication became online, sending threatening mails/messages became an easy job for many who want to vent out their inner anger, frustration or revenge. Today’s breaking news proves that again……. Noted lyricist Javeb Akhtar , one of my favourite personalities in Bombay filmdom has now been enlisted as the newest victim of cyber crime; he has received death threats from someone who felt it necessary to mail this ‘magician of words and lyrics’ stating that his time is limited (see Mohammed Wajihuddin & Vijay V Singh, ‘Javed Akhtar gets death threats on e-mail and SMS’,16th may, 2010,Times of India, available at http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOICH&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW&GZ=T)

Akhtar plays with words in fine tunes. Usage of language to express thoughts about social issues, evil customs, corruption and moral duties to prevent such corruption; about beauty of women;  responsibilities of  men; how mothers play their roles forever;what children mean to the society………is his forte. When the actor speaks Akhtar’s words, Indian audience, and in that matter, cinema lovers of all countries who understand Hindi/Urdu or are made to understand Hindi/Urdu through subtitles, either criy simultaneously with the other characters of the movie or laugh their heart out when the actor tries to make others jubilant with the help of Akhtar’s words.

The message of the mailer was even stronger than what Javed Akhtar spreads through movie actors………… the message conveys ‘shut up or you will die’. The impact of the words was so distraught that even the ‘magician of words’, felt disturbed and could not ignore the message but to report it to the police. I know many individuals may have received such threats which are inclusive of death threats, threat to kidnap their kin, threat to defame their name and reputation etc. And who are these people who send death threats? Strangely enough, they are infact one among us, educated, successful in their own ways, probably satisfied in their lives, but do not know their limitations while they are in the cyber space. Well, it is a curse of technology ………….people can use offensive language in any way they can and still remain anonymous. Isn’t it enough to create a panic? Those who have read the epic Ramayana, must know about Meghanad’s attack from behind the clouds. No one can see the attacker, and the attacker successfully carries out his operation and then returns to his own kingdom as a winner. I find ‘anonymous death threats through emails’ quite similar with the acts of this epic worrier prince. The victim becomes so traumatized due to the sudden attacks from ‘no where’ that he /she forgets his own potentials to fight back. And the attacker becomes successful……..yes, he created what he wanted to create…. ………the FEAR.

Well, our Information technology Act,2008 does not permit the offender to run away. Section 66A puts strong words against playing dangerous games with words in electronic communications. The provision is engraved with multipurpose effects: it covers grossly offensive communications which annoys the receiver; which is knowingly false but is communicated for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill will to and also against the receiver; and of course which may try to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages. And the punishment? Well… a jail term for two to three years and fine. The offence is bailable. But this must be read along with Indian Penal Code provision also for cases where the message carries threat to death, as that has happened to Javed Akhtar. Section 506 of the Indian penal Code prohibits criminal intimidation with punishment for two to three years or with fine. But the same law becomes stricter if the intimidation is meant to cause death, grievous hurt, destruction of the property etc.; or the threat is meant to cause any offence which is generally punishable with death, imprisonment for life or jail term for minimum seven years periods. In such cases the punishment may even put the offender behind bar for seven years and also inclusive of fines in certain cases.

The laws successfully convey the message that no one will be spared if they try to play with human emotions, especially, feelings for personal safety and security. Well, it depends upon the technology users to use cyber technologies in a lawful way or illegal way……………but remember, cyber space is created for good of mankind and not for destruction purpose; and if anybody plays hide and seek game, there are some others also who are interested to play cat and mouse chasing game and the mouse *will* be caught because the cat is trained to prevent injustice.

A Note to readers: Please do not violate the copyright issues of this blog .If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (May 2010), “Death threats in the Information Super Highway”, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com on May16, 2010,"