The Bombay High Court's observation last week, questioning the Union government's plans to set up a special unit to tackle fake news, was a welcome reminder of the role the higher judiciary can play to keep in check potential excesses by a ruling administration in Indian democracy. It also offered a refreshing dose of common logic that is far too often missing in the public discourse. Under the government's new information technology rules, a fresh unit under the Press Information Bureau will have the authority to decide what constitutes fake news. Online intermediary platforms, including social media sites, will have to pull down content decreed fake by this unit or lose a set of privileges that currently shield them from defamation and other similar provisions of the law. All indications so far suggest that the unit will focus on news about or related to the Central government itself. This sets up a direct conflict of interest. But the high court also had a more fundamental argument that the government lawyer could not answer. The PIB itself routinely sends out clarifications and rejoinders to media groups over articles or shows whose content it contests. The court is, therefore, right to question whether the Centre needs a separate fact-checking unit. If so, does it mean that the PIB is currently not effective in presenting the official point of view on news stories?

Even more fundamental questions are at stake here. India prizes itself as a democracy that regularly holds free and fair elections. It is the country's greatest calling card as it seeks global influence. Yet, while the country's elections are for the most part free, a level playing field is essential for them to be fair. Some of that has to do with electoral financing and how big money skews the scales in favour of some parties. But fair elections are also predicated on voters having access to information and perspectives from all political sides. At the moment, much of India's mainstream media have given up their role as watchdogs. Far too often, they serve as an extension of the government's propaganda arm. The new IT rules could muzzle the criticism and scrutiny that still make it to the public domain. That is particularly dangerous ahead of the 2024 general elections as the government and its opponents try to woo voters with competing narratives. The PIB's new unit must not have the monopoly on deciding what voters hear and see.