Recently day after the terrorist attack in Delhi this message was on the lips of every one
˝” Matam Chhaya Hai Sheher Mein, Bhara Bheed Se Hai Shamshaan,
Koi Puchhe Toh Keh Dena ,Ho Raha Hai Bharat Nirman .””
This message on one’s mobile will certainly agonize the conscience of a person. But such heart rending messages will no more flash on your screen as the government has put partial restrictions on it citing the issues of internal security and problems faced by common man. Now you are deprived of your rights to send messages of your likes, messages spreading joy, invitations for parties, social events etc. to your well-wishers as our government feels it is irrelevant and a cause of trouble. At a time when the government is hit from all four sides it is taking its attention away from other problems of common man and is falling hard on the rights of the citizens. There are other issues too that are in dire need of a solution but the government is heedless towards such issues. It is not a matter of intricate understanding that to what conspiracy is the government pointing at when the issues of inflation, corruption, terrorism, unemployment, hunger pose a herculean task before the government. Government is trying to place restrictions on the number of messages that we can send so as to frustrate youth.
Today when the entire globe is taking the form of a village, India is not much behind in this age of communication. Utility of mobile phone is proving extremely useful to connect people with one another in this age of communication. The unpractical and anti-public decision taken by TRAI to limit the number of mobile messages has angered youth. A nonagenarian or a young child does not send messages then why put restrictions on something which is indispensable for youth. If the technology is being misused then why not restrict the sale of SIM card which is sold for as less as the price of potatoes. Why is the youth being misled by the irresistible prices of SIM cards and call rates? The recent clarification made by the government made it amply clear that the government’s intention is to chain common man and not to control the unduly profit making attitude of the corporate companies. Government is deciding to relax companies to send as many commercial messages after charging some fees and considering some conditions. It makes it clear that common man will still be receiving those perplexing messages. Even today after the rule has been put in effect commercial messages continue to ring their way to our mobile phones. In a country where there is open encroachment in the area of SPECTRUM, rather than restricting the rights of common people government should focus on improving those weak areas owing to which enemies of our nation leak information.
3 important points to understand-
1) POLITICAL - A new wave has swept the country –to voice opinions against the flawed policies of the government using mobile phones. Issues like corruption are adding fuel to the fire to this sort of psychology; we want our societies to be free from the evils of these issues, and texting each other so as to gather in huge masses for rallies and stage demonstrations.
2) SOCIALl- Due to the recent spark ignited by Anna and Baba Ramdev, Youth is particularly agitated against the scandalous deeds of the government, rather than taking open routes to express the present plight of the society they have opted social networking sites as an effective tool to voice their opinions, suspension of ‘Musafir Baitha’ in Bihar is an example in this context. Desultory talk on Facebook and twitter has now seen a step ahead in the form of protests on road by the youth. This regulation is the result of the plot to curb the participation of youth. The policy which came into effect in 2007 could not be implemented properly, so the wrath against the wrong policies of the government is evident. So what does this decision of the government signal at? We do not need to strain our mind to understand this.
3)Legally :- This regulation violates the article 19(1) (a) and 21 of the constitution. In the language of law, two main strengths of democracy are Expression and Communication; mobile phones in some way or the other are connected with this, then is the government strengthening or weakening the democracy by this maximum limitation? Who has given the right to the government to deem one’s personal messages as pesky ones? If you cannot send 100 messages to others then what does it guarantee that government will put a limit on the maximum number of messages that a person can receive?
Some common questions come up in this situation which probably should come to your mind as well.:---
- Is the intention behind this move of the government in the name of the security clean? In the name of stopping bulk messages is this restraint on the mobile users a plot to quell public opinion?
- Commercial messages if one does not wish to receive, should be banned, why ban messages purpose of which is to exchange one’s ideas and opinions? Are we assured that companies aiming to make profits by hook or crook will not vex their customers by selling more SIM cards?
- Why cannot we consider schemes where consumer has the option to choose as to whose message to read and whose not rather than restricting the number of messages that can be sent?
- Will this not lessen mutual communication? Is this not paving way for antisocialism by curtailing the number of messages?
- Will this guarantee that we will stop receiving nasty messages on our phones in future?
- Socially active people are typically economically weak, does it point toward suppressing the voice of these people? Because they are not much capable of making calls in a situation when they cannot send messages?
- TRAI says that during festive season this restriction will be relaxed? Does it mean that we will be able to send messages to our friends, family members and well-wishers only on festivals? Mind you, on the day of the festivals we are required to shell out more money than usual. Will this not open an opportunity to make undue profits for telecom companies?
- Is this a plot to curb our fundamental rights indirectly in the name of security where we our free communication is being prevented?
This thought does not spring from the mind of a youth who is dejected because of the probable sadness of his inability to send messages to his girlfriend continuously. This rather represents the grief of those active in social life. We support every step of the government taken in view of the security but a Talibanic decision of this sort can never be deemed as correct. Who knows in future such policies are put in place that you cannot make more than 100 calls, cannot email more than 100 people because terrorists give information after the blast through emails?
In the present situation when people like Anna, Baba Ramdev have spearheaded movements to rid the system of structural deficiencies, then in such a scenario this decision, implemented by one of the highly minded person Kapil Sibal in the cabinet raises doubts, does the government want to stifle the voice of public movements and is bent on curbing youth participation in our democracy?
If you feel this is a sensitive issue then being an aware citizen we need to find a solution- will we keep bearing the lashes of such policies?
Question is not about sending or not sending 100 messages , question is why such unstated restrictions? Are we living in Taliban or in China where restriction is being placed on the simplest means of communication?
Students will continue to protest against this restriction till the government withdraws its decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment