Negatively Affects Access To Justice: Manipur High Court Says Statewide Mobile Internet Ban Cannot Be Continued

The Manipur High Court on Friday reiterated that the government could not continue with the ongoing mobile internet ban in the entire State, since internet services formed a part of the right to free speech of residents, under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court was hearing a PIL challenging the ongoing statewide internet ban. 

Notably, the Court was told that the State had extended its mobile internet ban till December 3rd, except for areas where it had been previously lifted.

A division bench of Chief Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Golmei Gaiphulshillu Kabui hauled up the state government for not entirely complying with earlier orders for the restoration of internet services in areas which had not been affected by the prevalent ethnic violence in the state. It said:

We are permitting you to impose reasonable restrictions in accordance with law but you can't obliterate the right. Except for a few areas, the State is by and large peaceful. Why should the services not be restored? Why does the State have to say that the situation is not normal? The situation is normal according to the State [in most areas]. So let everybody know that the situation is normal, except in [the affected] areas."

The bench further observed that while it was cognizant of the national security implications of restoring internet services in affected areas, the rights of those living in other areas of the State would have to be considered as well. It opined that nobody could deny that internet services today were a part of freedom of speech, albeit with reasonable restrictions.

Earlier, a coordinate bench had directed the State to begin operationalising the State's mobile towers, on a trial basis, in all districts, which had not been affected by the ethnic violence. It had also ordered the State to consider and inform the Court about the possibility of restoring internet services to the Greater Imphal area.

In underscoring its concerns, the Court highlighted that the absence of internet services was negatively affecting the dispensation of justice in the State. It observed that video conferencing facilities existed in such cases to allow litigants to appear before court and alert it of areas which needed the court's intervention. 

If a person in a violence affected area needs to file a complaint, where will he go and who will he approach? How else are people going to access justice from areas where you say they are affected by violence? How will they access justice? Access to justice is not just a slogan. We have to make sure every citizen has access to justice. How else will they access it?” the Court remarked.

The Court, in conclusion, held that the present litigation was not adversarial and that the petitioners did not want to undermine national security, but that the concerns over the rights of the Manipuri people had to be taken into account.

Accordingly, it sought a detailed status report from the State on its orders pertaining to the restoration of internet services in areas of Manipur which were unaffected by violence.