Kathmandu, March 1: At a time when the government has claimed the social media bill was brought for systematizing the use of social networking sites, the human rights defenders and experts on cyber law and cyber crime have underlined the need for correcting the bill. The social media bill which has been registered in the upper house of the federal parliament has drawn critical views and suggestions from media fraternity as well.

At the same time, government has reiterated its stand that the bill was brought to curb anarchy in digital platforms. Government Spokesperson and Minister for Communications and Information Technology, Prithvi Subba Gurung, said in a recent programme that the bill relating to use of social networking site would not curtail freedom of expression and press. Government is always for the protection of free speech, but anarchy in social media needs ceasing, he underlined.

The bill has aimed at making social media platform operators and users accountable and responsible; regulating and making the use and users of social media respected, safe and well managed; ensuring privacy on electronic medium by maintaining fundamental right to free speech and promoting social harmony, cultural tolerance and good governance, among others. However, free speech advocates argue that the provisions in the bill have the capacity to curtail free speech. “It is essential to have Social Media Act in Nepal, which should facilitate the citizen’s practices of freedoms on digital spheres, but the provision in the bill are control-oriented,” said Dr Shree Krishna Bhattarai, a leading expert on cybercrime and cyber law in Nepal.

Dr Bhattarai viewed that the drafting of this bill reflected sheer dearth of knowledge on cyber jurisprudence. He raised various points ranging from absence of conceptual clarity of social media to overlapping provisions, which he claimed, resulted in blurred difference between social media and mass media.

“Social media can not be regarded as a crime tool, but regulated in a way that promotes citizen’s rights and curb downsides,” he said, suggesting the removal of overlapping issues like the provisions mentioned already in Civil and Criminal Codes. In his argument, once all acts are left open for law enforcement agencies, the misuse of law could be highly likely, thereby creating the situation against ‘double jeopardy principle’.

Human rights defenders Charan Prasai and Dr Gopal Krishna Shivakoti said civil space was shrinking, so the civil society activists and leaders should be united and raise the issues of human rights continuously.