
Man faces 3 years in prison for tweeting about finance minister in India - ashray
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/iac-volunteer-tweets-himself-into-trouble-faces-three-years-in-jail/article4051769.ece
======
suprgeek
Everybody on this thread is focusing (possibly rightly) on the issue of how
badly drafted the law is and how broad it is. What people in the forum might
not appreciate is how completely the Police in India is under the thumb of of
the politically connected and the Rich. Having stayed in India for the last 5
years, the modern version of the Police force is a very scary to behold.

Imagine that this is the result of an EMAIL from the son of the Union
minister. In India even in very serious cases involving common people such as
Murder, Arson, Rape etc the police always make a show of waiting for a WRITTEN
compliant before they can even start investigation. The politicians cynically
abuse the Police force to openly stifle dissent and hassle the common man -
India is descending into a Banana republic at an alarming speed - very sad.

~~~
thewisedude
I for one think that if the law was drafted "properly", there is very little
police can do about it even if the ministers (who supposedly use them) are
pissed off and want the police to do something about it.

Such cases happen even in USA, where certain people are charged for
misdemeanor's which are not uniformly enforced across the population. An
example I can think of is the Eliot Spitzer-Call Girl in DC scandal.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Just to clarify, Spitzer escaped prosecution for hiring prostitutes. However,
he personally prosecuted many people for prostitution.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-
spitzer.htm...](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-
spitzer.html?hp=&pagewanted=all)

(I read your wording as implying Spitzer was subjected to harsher treatment
than normal, so thought the clarification was helpful.)

------
peteretep
As a European, it can sometimes be hard to appreciate America's guarantees of
free speech, especially as you only really ever hear about the "negative"
aspects of it - Citizens United, for example.

But more and more it seems that countries that have nominally vibrant
democracies are making certain types of speech criminal - I wonder if there'll
be a groundswell of activism to get free speech retroactively enshrined as a
right in countries where such a thing never really seemed needed before.

~~~
rayiner
Citizens United often gets brought up when people over here talk about
limiting political speech, but one thing I like to remind people is that: 1)
Citizens United was about a movie criticizing a Presidential candidate--the
exact kind of political speech that should be most protected; 2) the Soliciter
General put his foot in his mouth in the most terrible way when he basically
admitted that the law would allow book banning.

I also like to point out that in the very next term the Supreme Court struck
down California's violent video game law, which was widely lauded by liberals
even though had Citizens United gone the other way, Rockstar Games would have
no free speech rights to raise in that case.

Free speech really is the real deal here, and I find it upsetting how much
flak the Supreme Court has gotten for staying true to their line of decisions.
This is a Supreme Court that in the midst of Vietnam protected a protestor who
said that if the government ever made him carry a rifle (to go to war), the
first person in his sights would be President Johnson.

~~~
pstuart
The movie was paid speech - it was a commercial.

~~~
rayiner
A commercial or advertisement is defined as something that "poses nothing more
than a commercial transaction." E.g. "Buy this iPad it's great!"

There is no way to shoe-horn "Hilary: The Movie" into the "just a commercial"
mold. Here are a list of other movies produced by Citizens United: "ACLU: At
War with America" (this one is ironic); "Broken Promises: The UN at 60";
"Rediscovering God in America." Now, you might not like the organization's
political message, but I don't see a principled way to distinguish them from
some of my Sierra Club favorites like "Coal Country" and "Oil on Ice."

What is "paid speech" even supposed to mean? What movies don't cost money to
make? Or for that matter books or pamphlets or newspapers? Both Citizens
United and the Sierra Club are not-for-profit corporations. They are created
for the express purpose of getting out a particular message, and that costs
money. Their message should not be taken out of the protection of the First
Amendment just because of that fact.

It should be noted that Grand Theft Auto not only cost money, but it was a
for-profit product...

~~~
batgaijin
It's not about money, it's about the paper trail. Who's responsible? Who is
spending the money? Who is donating the money?

These are basic things that need to be made obvious.

Buy all the ads you want, it's fine with me. As long as I know you are the one
buying the ads.

~~~
CamperBob2
Who cares who bought the ads? Do you use that as a basis for evaluating their
truth?

~~~
Karunamon
In the case of corporate sponsored speech? You bet I do. And "truth" isn't the
problem so much as bias. You can state the exact same true fact 50 different
ways and spin it to mean almost anything you want.

------
denzil_correa
What an arcane law!

 _Section 66-A deals with messages sent via computer or communication devices
which may be “grossly offensive,” have “menacing character,” or even cause
“annoyance or inconvenience.” For offences under the section, a person can be
fined and jailed up to three years._

If you cause "annoyance" or "inconvenience" to someone, you can be fined or
jailed up to three years!

Edit - He has also clarified that he has just cited media reports and not made
any new revelation. He just has 16 followers on Twitter. His arrest has got
more to do with his involvement with IAC(India against Corruption) than
anything else.

~~~
kamaal
>>If you cause "annoyance" or "inconvenience" to someone, you can be fined or
jailed up to three years!

This doesn't even begin to describe ridiculous. Ever heard of IPC 498a?

For those who don't what it is-
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowry_law_in_India>

The law is such, you might even repent being a born a boy in India.

~~~
damncabbage

      (a) Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive
      the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life,
      limb or health whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
    
      (b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing
      her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any
      property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any
      person related to her meet such demand.[8]
    

Could you elaborate on your objections to the above? I am not familiar with
its use or misuse.

~~~
kamaal
If they apply it as is, I don't have a issue. The law is misused heavily.
According to the law you can be incarcerated for at least 60 days, just on a
complain. In other words you can be arrested just because a women complains,
even if no evidence is found, or they don't even have to ask for evidence. The
presumption of guilt prevails. You are presumed to be a offender. This law has
been often used for near extortion scenarios. It works like this, since it
covers the women of the husbands family. Often younger sister of the husband
is arrested or his mother is arrested. He will be called to police station to
part away his with his property, and generally the arrests are made on
Friday's so that these people can stay in jail over the weekend until a bail
application can be filed on Monday.

Women are heavily abusing this law for money. Its like marry a guy, slap a
498a case. Get his family members behind bars(Often happens after bribing the
policemen). In India its highly devastating to a persons morale, self respect
and social status for him to go to jail or see female members of the family go
to jail. Then what follows is a black mail and guy is forced to pay up.

The law has been abused by the police and some women so much. From what I've
heard, the judges look at every case like it might be fake. Read the Wikipedia
link for details.

Some more links on this.

    
    
        http://www.498a.org/
        http://www.indianexpress.com/news/women-are-misusing-dowry-act-rules-court/574907
        http://www.firstpost.com/fwire/law-commission-recommends-dilution-of-anti-dowry-law-188059.html
    

Given the abuse the supreme court of India itself has recommend dilution of
this law.

~~~
nodemaker
To be fair, the majority of men are pretty barbaric and do physically abuse
women after marriage. They totally deserve a law like that. I have heard so
many stories of brides getting physically and emotionally abused by their in-
laws and husband that I pretty much consider it a part of our culture.

~~~
kamaal
We are not debating about offenders here. We are debating about the abuse of
law used to extort money from innocent people.

~~~
nodemaker
Yes and I am putting forward a use of the law to deter offenders who happen to
exist in large numbers. Domestic Violence is a serious problem in India and a
law like this does help.

------
andyjohnson0
_Section 66-A deals with messages sent via computer or communication devices
which may be “grossly offensive,” have “menacing character,” or even cause
“annoyance or inconvenience.”_

Sounds similar to the laws we have here in the UK. Section 127(2) of the
Communications Act 2003 [1] states:

 _(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing
annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he— (a)sends by means
of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be
false, (b)causes such a message to be sent; or (c)persistently makes use of a
public electronic communications network._

The act allows for imprisonment for up to six months, or a fine. It was the
legal basis for the "Twitter Joke" trial [2]. In my opinion it is worryingly
broad in its scope.

[1] <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127>

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Joke_Trial>

~~~
experiment0
Great speech from Rowan Atkinson about this.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=g...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gciegyiLYtY)

~~~
tetomb
Thanks for posting this. <http://reformsection5.org.uk/> Looks interesting.

------
nsomaru
Sad, and typical.

I have lived in India for the last 3 years and at first I was angry, then
disgusted, but now it's just sadness.

To see a country with so much potential throw themselves into such a quagmire
of ridiculousness stirs my soul to mutiny!

There is a culture of corruption, and this article just highlights one of
thousands of daily acts of corruption that happen on macro and micro scales.

India needs a cultural revolution, someone to suck the apathy out of the
people and make them demand responsibility from their leaders.

~~~
w1ntermute
> India needs a cultural revolution, someone to suck the apathy out of the
> people and make them demand responsibility from their leaders.

The problem is that it's difficult to have a good democracy when you have low
levels of human development. When 25% of the population is illiterate, a good
number more lack a basic education, and half the children are malnourished,
it's very difficult to get your average person on the street to care enough to
make the right decision when election time rolls around.

~~~
amalag
It's like the difference between a group of college students electing their
teacher and a kindergarten electing their teacher.

------
denzil_correa
This is going to be interesting actually. Article 19 of the Indian
constitution grants right to freedom of speech.

    
    
        *All citizens shall have the right* —
        to freedom of speech and expression;
        to assemble peaceably and without arms;
        to form associations or unions;
        to move freely throughout the territory of India;
        to reside and settle in any part of the territory of      India; and
        to practise any profession, or to carry on any    occupation, trade or business.
    
        *These rights are limited so as not to effect*:
        The integrity of India
        The security of the State
        Friendly relations with foreign States
        Public order
        Decency or morality
        Contempt of court
        Defamation or incitement to an offence
    

<http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/Art1-242%20(1-88).doc>

~~~
kamaal
Their aim is not to send him to prison, but to trouble him and give him so
many hassles with police and courts that he finally gives up.

By that way, they get to 'teach him the lesson' and 'make him example' to
deter others from doing it.

~~~
denzil_correa
> _By that way, they get to 'teach him the lesson' and 'make him example' to
> deter others from doing it._

I think it's going to back fire as it has done in the recent past.

------
sergiotapia
Reminds me heavily of our Vice-President Alvaro Garcia Linera (Bolivia) going
on record saying:

"I'm reading every negative post on Facebook that speaks ill of the government
and writing down names. Names are being written down."

What horseshit! Scary thought; North Americans seem to take their free-speech
for granted, as an inalienable right when in fact many countries in the world
don't have such a thing. Enjoy it while you can.

~~~
TopTrix
Your should be thankful to God that you live in America.

~~~
CamperBob2
God had nothing to do with anything. We only have our First Amendment
protections because some Americans believed in them strongly enough to die
and/or kill for them.

------
solutionyogi
Sad and proves once again that India has no freedom of speech.

Great article on the topic by Amit Varma.

Don't Insult Pasta: <http://indiauncut.com/iublog/article/dont-insult-pasta/>

One of the most impressing thing about USA is that they have true freedom of
speech and majority of people defend it furiously. I can't help but think but
this is one of the major factor America is one of the leading nations in the
world.

------
TopTrix
India is not a country, where constitution works for Common man You have to
have money power, muscle power and much more to use the rights give by
constitution of India.

Most of the peoples always try to not to go to judiciary in whole life,
because it will take your whole life time to get the results and you have to
pour all your income, time in visiting dates of trial. No one -common people-
believe the law and are realized it and get used to it. There are millions of
cased pending in courts which are more than 70 60 yrs old and I feel the
British rule was much better than this.

may i get punished to say all this, though this is the case with everyone and
anything can happen with anyone.

------
leephillips
India also has a law against “deliberately hurting religious feelings,” which
was exploited recently[1] by the Catholic Church.

[1] <http://lee-phillips.org/IndiaNoDemocracy/>

------
denzil_correa
There is now a "Campaign Against Arrest of Ravi Srinivasan for a Tweet" [0].
This issue is getting a lot of attention in the international media too [1].

[0] <http://getup4change.org/rti/support-free-speech/> [1]
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/10/31...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/10/31/in-
india-a-tweet-can-land-you-in-jail/)

------
savrajsingh
Here's an article in NYT that gives you insight into the Indian Justice
System:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/01/world/in-india-the-
wheels-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/01/world/in-india-the-wheels-of-
justice-hardly-move.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm)

And here's an example of an organization fighting for justice against state
crimes:

<http://www.ensaaf.org>

------
ananthrk
The tweet was not even about the finance minister (Mr. Chidambaram) but about
the finance minister's son (Karthi Chidambaram)

~~~
ashray
Yeah I got confused by the article because it mentioned something about the
tweets being about P Chidambaram.

 _Other such tweets reportedly made references to Mr. P. Chidambaram._

The fact that the tweet is about an even more low profile guy (although he IS
the son of said finance minister) makes this even worse.

------
poundy
“If you write a book that annoys or inconveniences me, even deliberately, I
have no civil or criminal recourse. But if you send an e-mail message, or post
a tweet, you could face three years in jail,” says Mr. Prakash. “That’s higher
than the two-year imprisonment for causing death by negligence.”

~~~
sageikosa
That's when you start looking for tweets that promote the book...

------
shrikant
<https://twitter.com/ravi_the_indian>

According to the article, he had 16 followers as of Wednesday evening. Now he
has 869 and growing.

Great work, Mr. Politico, you would get along fabulously with Barbra
Streisand.

------
known
"Diverse society is bound to fail" --Robert Putnam.
[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/t...](http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/)

------
known
Campaign Against Arrest of Ravi Srinivasan for a Tweet
<http://getup4change.org/rti/support-free-speech/>

------
known
Caste = Corrupt by birth.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_in_India>

------
fredBuddemeyer
does anyone have any ideas on what we could do to help this person?

~~~
swamy_g
Follow him on Twitter, use a hash tag (#SupportRaviSrinivasan or whatever), if
you are outside India, tweet to your local/national news papers. Or just bomb
@KartiPC with your complaints.

