The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Centre’s attempt to notify a fact checking unit as a statutory body under the Press Information Bureau is welcome. But the relief should not deflect public attention from a number of disquieting developments. Last year, the ministry of electronics and information technology had notified amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 in order to facilitate the creation of an FCU. The latter was intended to censor online content pertaining to — the expression must be noted — “any business of the Central government” that was deemed as ‘fake’ or ‘misleading’ news. The FCU’s powers and reach appeared to be notoriously expansive and intrusive. While the definition of ‘misleading’ information remained vague, and thus subject to mischief, intermediaries, such as internet service providers, social media platforms and digital entities, would be expected to take down content identified as such by the FCU, which, incidentally was not expected to provide written orders by way of explaining its actions. What is evident from the attempt was the Centre’s temptation to play both judge and executioner. The price of such a dual role, as has been repeatedly highlighted by the proponents of free speech, can only be inimical to a democracy. Dissent would be curtailed along with the freedom of expression with the setting up of such surveilling entities.

The danger, though, has not been averted altogether. This is because the Narendra Modi government has, in a tearing hurry, passed a number of legislations some of whose provisions are alleged to be conducive to the inception of a surveillance State. The Telecommunication Act, Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, Press and Registration of Periodicals Act, even the Post Office Act — it empowers the government to intercept mail — have been criticised for their alleged potential to encroach on the liberties that should protect diverse media, forms of communication and other relevant spaces. It would be difficult not to view the Centre’s attempt to foist the FCU through this prism of totalitarian control. What is worrying is that public concern for or awareness about such transgressions remains minimal. This forestalls the possibility of an electoral backlash. A democracy unaware of the weakening of the edifice on which rests its democratic ethos is a strange — tragic — irony.