Monday,
October 7, 2002
|
|
Book
Review |
|
Rightfully questioning
cyber jurisprudence
Review by Ali Hasnain
Cyberlaw –The Indian Perspective by Pavan Duggal. Saakshar Law Publications. Pages 584, Price Rs. 630
THE
phenomenal growth of the Internet is unparalleled. On the one hand the
Internet has a stake in the economies of the world while on the other it
has gripped popular imagination by providing easy communication,
entertainment, leisure and relaxation. The global village is more of a
reality today than it was ever before. The Internet is continually
changing the dynamics of the world. The law needs to be alive to this
change in society. Roscoe Pound once said, "Legal order must be
flexible as well as stable. Law must be overhauled continually and
refitted continually to the change in social life which it is to
govern" With that goal in mind the Indian Parliament went about
legislating the first cyber law and christened it the Information and
Technology Act. It was never going to be easy legislating on a subject
like information technology simply because technology is ever changing
and more so in the cyber world. ‘Cyber Law - The Indian Perspective’
is perhaps the first commentary on the statute. Cyber jurisprudence is
still in its embryonic stage and the book will go some distance in
providing direction to this study. Duggal’s book throws up more
questions than it answers but then that itself is a great feat.
Articulating and bring these questions into the public domain is in
itself a great service to cyber jurisprudence. Cyber laws are grappling
with a range of issues and none of them have simple answers. Take, for
example, the issue of jurisdiction. In the good old days it was the
"law of the land" that prevailed but the Information
Technology Act provides for extra-territorial jurisdiction (with good
reason) although in the prevailing circumstances the provision is of
mere academic value (The provision may have more meaning once an
international machinery to check cyber crimes is put in place). Duggal
analyses the issue of jurisdiction from all angles, never failing to
cite cases of other countries where the argument so demands. It is
exciting and stimulating to the legal mind to see how the judiciary in
other parts of the world is tackling these problems. The regulation of
the Internet (and, mind you, regulation is essential) poses some unique
problems to the lawmakers. The Internet threatens to turn on its head
some settled principles of law and will definitely pose some peculiar
questions to the judiciary. It seems that cyber law is pressing hard
against the existing and settled boundaries of legal principles to
evolve and adapt to new and unforeseen circumstances and unique issues
that the cyber world presents. In that context the legislation is a
futuristic attempt providing some guidelines, a broad framework to the
judiciary that in any case is probably ill-equipped to appreciate
technical nuances of cyber law. Therefore the special tribunal envisaged
in the Act will be very beneficial.
The book brings some
legitimate apprehensions to the fore. Like the absence of a
comprehensive PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) policy, which is so
essential to e-commerce, one of the objectives of the Act. The Act
simultaneously empowers both the controller under Section 28 and the
adjudicating officer under Section 46(1) of the IT Act to investigate or
inquire into contraventions mentioned in Chapter IX. Another faux pas
brought out is the requirement of a CPS (certification practice
statement) from prospective users of Digital Signature Certificates that
is wholly erroneous and needs to be amended immediately.
The book deals at length
with the chapter on offences. It provides a brief write up of the cases
currently being investigated. The author has made some interesting
observations regarding the need to balance "right to privacy"
with national security concerns. The one that got me really thinking was
his view that S. 69(2), (3) maybe ultra vires the Constitutional mandate
and the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(3) which is the
right against self-incrimination. Section 69 deals with the Controller’s
power to intercept information on grounds of national security etc.
Clauses 2 and 3 of this section
mandate that the subscriber or any person in charge of the computer
resource, shall extend all facilities and technical assistance to
decrypt information. Any failure to extend such help may lead to
imprisonment that may extend to seven years.
One may not agree with all
the propositions put forward by the author, nonetheless his book does
help in understanding the Information Technology Act better. Most
importantly the book gets you thinking. What more can a lawyer ask for?
|