Pavan Duggal Quoted by various National and International Media-

The Hindu Business Line quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This is high time for the government for the review of the law. The government should amend the IT Act so as to narrow down its provisions as some of these violate our constitutional right of free speech.”
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/netizens-flay-mumbai-girls-arrest-over-facebook-post/article4112384.ece;

The New York Times quoted Pavan Duggal saying “The law is so broad, it gives unbridled power to the authorities to register a case. It leaves everything to the subjective discretion of the law enforcement authorities.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/21/world/asia/india-police-arrest-student-over-facebook-post.html
Daily Mail UK quoted Pavan Duggal saying “66A is a black hole. It was drafted in very wide terms and is capable of distinctive interpretations, leaving a lot of discretion in the hands of the police”.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2236084/Arrest-Mumbai-girls-Facebook-comments-sparks-anger-draconian-IT-Act.html;

Rediffnews quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This section is very broad and is capable of distinct interpretation by different entities. It could be called draconian due to the huge ambit of space that it covers. It speaks of sending information that is grossly offensive, menacing and information that causes annoyance.”
http://www.rediff.com/news/report/facebook-post-arrest-case-the-road-ahead-for-the-accused/20121119.htm

PC WORLD Australia quoted Pavan Duggal saying “There have not been any convictions so far under Section 66A, because its wording is vague. But the language that is used in the law is so “wide and broad” that it can be used by law enforcement agencies to target and harass people. Section 66A by its vagueness goes beyond the restrictions on free speech already in place under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. The interpretation of an offence under the section is largely left to the discretion of the complainant and the law enforcement agencies”.
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/442652/arrests_indian_facebook_users_raise_questions_about_india_cyberlaws/

Avashya quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Messages on a social networking can be used as electronic evidence under the IT Act”
http://www.avashya.com/articles/share/107799/

NVN news quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This is high time for the government for the review of the law. The government should amend the IT Act so as to narrow down its provisions as some of these violate our constitutional right of free speech. It would be a bigger challenge for the prosecution to prove that the statement could incite communal disharmony and violence”. http://www.nationalvisionnews.com/hdetails.php?nTId=MjEwMA==

Business-Standard quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This is just the tip of the iceberg and as the use of social networks will increase, you will see such abuse of power. The use of Section 505 of IPC is just not applicable”
http://business-standard.com/india/news/bail-to-students-arrested-over-facebook-post/493046/;

Sify news quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Section 66 (a) of the IT Act, which was introduced in 2008 after the Mumbai terror attacks is in direct conflict with Article 19 of the Constitution, which talks about freedom of speech and expression”. Section 66 (a) can be misused. It’s high time the government put its acts together. This section should be completely removed or its scope narrowed, else the current Act can act as a tool for oppressing freedom of speech”.
http://www.sify.com/news/facebook-comment-case-is-it-time-to-amend-the-it-act-news-columns-mlvbGDffbih.html;

Yahoo News quoted Pavan Duggal saying “My suggestion to all users would be, be careful about what they write, abstain from posting anything that can be interpreted as defamatory without any proof.”
http://news.yahoo.com/netizens-cry-murder-log-off-social-groups-225503925.html

MXM India quoted Pavan Duggal saying “when a person clicks on “Like” button on Facebook, it does not constitute an offence under Section 66A. Technically speaking, a person is only clicking the button of “Like” but is not per se either sending any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character. Neither is the said person sending any information which he knows to be false but which has been sent for the purposes of causing annoyance, inconvenience, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill-will.

http://www.mxmindia.com/2012/11/are-we-really-free-to-post-online/

CIOL quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Grossly offensive or has menacing character are vast terms. Legislation has left it to subjective disrection of the person,”
http://www.ciol.com/ciol/news/122177/fb-arrests-cyber-activists-india-democrazy/page/4

Data Quest quoted Pavan Duggal saying “While Section 66A talks about sending any information that is grossly offensive or having menacing character; the law does not give any guidance as to what is grossly offensive or information having menacing character. Thus, it is left to the subjective description of the law-enforcement agencies in this regard”
http://www.dqindia.com/dataquest/analysis/122304/the-deathly-hallow-section-66a-indian-it-act/page/1

Indiatvnews and livemint quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Section 66A tends to impose restrictions that go beyond resonable curbs under Article 19 of the Constitution, which provides for freedom of speech and expression. No doubt that this section is a potent tool in the hands of powerful to silence criticism against them.”
http://www.indiatvnews.com/print/news/outcry-netizens-man-arrested-tweeting-chidambaram-son-6715-4.html;
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/nSMOJy0NzUiK6N0e5M0f0N/Arrest-for-tweets-against-FMs-son-raises-new-fears.html?facet=print

Peoplematters quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Section 66A has the potential of becoming a dangerous tool that can be used to gag legitimate free speech online”.
http://peoplematters.in/articles/learning-curve/be-careful
Livemint quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Section 66A tends to impose restrictions that go beyond resonable curbs under Article 19 of the Constitution, which provides for freedom of speech and expression”. “No doubt that this section is a potent tool in the hands of powerful to silence criticism against them.”
“This law is liable to be abused,”
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/nSMOJy0NzUiK6N0e5M0f0N/Arrest-for-tweets-against-FMs-son-raises-new-fears.html

IBN Live quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This is high time for the government for the review of the law. The government should amend the IT Act so as to narrow down its provisions as some of the these violate our constitutional right of free speech.”
http://m.ibnlive.com/news/internet-users-flay-mumbai-girls-arrest-over-facebook-post/306360-3.html

India Today quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This (Act) has effectively become a tool in the hands of the mighty and the powerful to gag criticism,”. “Till such time as 66A is not clarified, and adequate parameters are not put in place to prevent its abuse, it will continue to be a tool of the mighty and could be used to muzzle free speech.”
http://mobile.indiatoday.in/story/crime-committed-harsh-punishment-democracy-mamata-pc-son-hijack/1/227282.html

Daily Mail quoted Pavan Duggal saying “This (Act) has effectively become a tool in the hands of the mighty and the powerful to gag criticism,” “Till such time as 66A is not clarified, and adequate parameters are not put in place to prevent its abuse, it will continue to be a tool of the mighty and could be used to muzzle free speech.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2226456/Revealed-Draconian-penalties-rise-India–And-punishment-doesnt-fit-crime.html

PC Advisor UK quoted Pavan Duggal saying “Rushed through by the government soon after terrorist attacks in Mumbai in 2008, Section 66A of the IT Act is deliberately vague and can lead to a variety of interpretations, said Pavan Duggal, a cyberlaw expert who practices before India’s Supreme Court.
…… There have not been any convictions so far under Section 66A, because its wording is vague, Duggal said. But the language that is used in the law is so “wide and broad” that it can be used by law enforcement agencies to target and harass people, he added.
Section 66A by its vagueness goes beyond the restrictions on free speech already in place under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, Duggal said. The interpretation of an offence under the section is largely left to the discretion of the complainant and the law enforcement agencies, he added.”

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/internet/3412377/arrests-of-indian-facebook-users-raise-questions-about-indias-cyberlaws/;

Advertisements
By mobilelawconf

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s