Wiser counsels have prevailed following widespread criticism of the ordinance, and the Government has beaten a hasty retreat feeling the heat. Although the Government has decided not to go ahead with its implementation, the law has come into effect. The Government has to bring in another Ordinance if it is serious about not enforcing the law. A mere statement by the Chief Minister cannot do that. Another option is to recommend its withdrawal to the Governor who can then recall it. A third option is for a court to strike it down.

The ill-thought out move has caused a big dent in the Pinarayi Government’s credibility and reputation, which is already under severe strain. The shocking move has come at a time when the Government is fighting the crucial local bodies’ elections.

The new law, which stipulates imprisonment up to three years or a fine of up to Rs 3000 for those who produce, publish or disseminate content with an intention to intimidate, insult or defame a person through any means of communication, was published in the gazette on Saturday.

The Chief Minister and other CPI-M leaders tried to justify the Ordinance saying that it was necessary to end widespread misuse of the social media. In the name of the freedom of the press individual freedom cannot be violated he said, adding that the Government has been receiving complaints of instances in which inhuman and vile cyber attacks were carried out by some in the guise of journalism. This was unacceptable and cannot be tolerated, he averred.

The dangerous decision evoked criticism not only from within the State but also at the national level. The crux of the criticism was that the newly included Section 118 A was draconian. Even traditional supporters of the LDF Government frowned upon the ordinance. The last straw was the reprimand from CPI-M general secretary Sitaram Yechury himself – the first time that the CPI-M central leadership has publicly criticised the Pinarayi Government’s policy decision.

The Opposition has, expectedly, lost no time to accuse the government of trying to gag the media through the black law under the guise of curbing cyber attacks. The idea was to silence critics of the government during the remaining six months of the Government’s term, they alleged.

Legal experts, however, say that Section 119 of the Police Act would have sufficed to tackle cyber attacks against individuals. There was no need for the Government to introduce a new section – 118 A -to the Police Act.

The Government would have minimized the damage if it had limited the application of the ordinance to social media alone. But the notification clearly says “through any kind of mode of communication” thereby expanding the scope of its interpretation. The print media and the visual media, too, would have come under the scanner.

Legal experts are of the view that, if the amendment is enforced, policemen would be free to pick up anyone even in the dead of the night, for the criticism made on the social media. It would have been the beginning of police raj, they said.

By introducing Section 118 A in the ordinance, Kerala Government was seeking to revive Section 66A of the IT Act and Section 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act, struck down by the Supreme Court in March 2115. The Court did so because it found the sections violative of free speech. Section 118A of the Kerala Police(Amendment) Ordinance too would have suffered a similar fate if challenged in a court.

The Pinarayi Government should learn appropriate lessons from the unsavory episode it should shed its propensity to take controversial decisions at least during the remainder of its term which ends in May 2021. Instead of courting controversies, the Government should fully focus on people-friendly steps and social welfare measures. Its track record in this regard is pretty good. The Government should not fritter away the gains by taking wrong and controversial decisions. That way alone it can hope to offset the damage caused by the gold smuggling case, Life Mission Project ‘scam’ and imprisonment of senior CPI(M) leader Kodiyeri Balakrishnan’s son Bineesh in a drug trafficking case. (IPA Service)