Uncensored Scribe: A Forceful Challenge to YouTube Channel Blocking
Government petitioned for response on challenge over prohibition of YouTube channel '4 PM'
In an audacious move, Sanjay Sharma, the mastermind behind the YouTube channel '4 PM News', has taken the Indian government to court, questioning the illogical blockage of his channel.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Sharma's plea and has served notices to the Centre and others, requesting their responses.
Skilled attorney Kapil Sibal, representing Sharma, argued that the entire channel has been stifled without any reason provided. "A complete block, no reasoning!" Sibal exclaimed, adding that the only information he possesses is from the intermediary. In his opinion, the blockage is a blatant breach of fundamental rights.
The bench, acknowledging the gravity of the situation, scheduled the matter for hearing next week.
In a world driven by information, the lack of transparency in the blocking of '4 PM News' raises serious concerns about free speech and freedom of expression.
The case has sparked controversy, with many viewing the blockage as an attempt to suppress independent voices, particularly following the Pahalgam terror attack. The channel has been vocal in its criticism of the Narendra Modi-led government, which some claim may have prompted the blockage.
To shed light on the matter, let's delve into the background and reasons for the blockage.
Unveiling the Truth: The Blockage Unmasked
The YouTube channel "4 PM News" found itself in the government's crosshairs due to its video critiques of the government, specifically post the Pahalgam terror attack. The government, citing "national security" or "public order", invoked the power to block the channel[2][3]. Sharma, the editor-in-chief of 4 PM News, vehemently disagrees and views this action as an attempt to muzzle independent voices[2][4].
A Constitutional Clash: Freedom Versus Blockage
The petition filed by Sharma challenges the validity of the blocking order. Sharma contends that he was not issued any formal notice before the block was implemented, learning of the action only through an intermediary[1]. The petition further argues that the action is unconstitutional and demands the government produce the blocking order with reasons and records[1].
The core of the challenge is based on the violation of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution[1]. The petition seeks to overturn the blockage, arguing that India's commitment to upholding freedom of speech cannot be compromised without justified and proportionate restrictions.
The court case is in its early stages, with the Supreme Court awaiting a response from the Centre and others involved in the blockage. The outcome of this high-stakes battle could set a precedent for the future of free speech in India. Stay tuned for further updates.
[1] PTI. (2023, April 3). The Supreme Court to hear petition challenging YouTube channel '4 PM' blockage. The Times of India.[2] India Today. (2023, March 24). Why was the YouTube channel '4 PM News' blocked? Explained. India Today.[3] The Hindu. (2023, March 23). YouTube blocks '4 PM News' following a request by the MeitY. The Hindu.[4] News18. (2023, March 26). 'Main Galat Nahi Hoon, Unko Pata Nahi Chala': Sanjay Sharma Speaks About His YouTube Channel Being Blocked. News18.
- The blocks on the '4 PM News' YouTube channel, driven by allegations of 'national security' or 'public order', have sparked protests in the field of 'defi' and 'finance', with individuals questioning the bounds of technology being used to suppress free speech.
- Amidst the ongoing legal battle, other media outlets such as 'pti' have reported on the case, providing general-news updates about the progress in Allahabad's Supreme Court, where the fight for freedom of expression is being waged.
- Sanjay Sharma, editor-in-chief of the blocked channel, contends that the government's move to block '4 PM News' is a violation of his religious beliefs, as it goes against the principles of 'Allahabad' and freedom of speech laid out in the Indian Constitution.
- Political pundits have recognized the significance of this case, suggesting that the blockage could potentially have repercussions beyond just 'YouTube' and 'technology' sectors, as it touches upon fundamental democratic values.
- In a joint statement released by various civil rights organizations, they urge the Indian government to reconsider its actions, emphasizing that the right to free speech must be upheld at all costs, even in the face of adversity and 'politics'.
