Hi Rishikesh,
On 09/10/2017 11:49 PM, RISHIKESH BHOLAH wrote:
>
> Considering the same above reasoning, if a popular person with a
> significant fan-base, voices out his opinion towards the current
> government (can be considered harmful). ICTA can issue an Internet
> censorship as it appears within the ICT Act but also to mention, this is
> strongly in contradiction with the freedom of expression from the
> constitution [3] which could lead the former to be void. I would like to
> know the opinion of you folks on this matter? And also should the term
> 'harmful' be interpreted so as to limit the power of the ICTA on such
> matters?
Section 18(m) of the Information and Communication Technologies Act 2001
of Mauritius states:
« The Authority shall take steps to regulate or curtail the harmful
and illegal content on the Internet and other information and
communication services. »
Section 3(b) of the Constitution of Mauritius protects the following right:
« freedom of conscience, of expression, of assembly and association
and freedom to establish school »
It is up to a court of law to decide whether a content is deemed harmful
and cannot be considered as free expression. When you cited the incident
of Facebook censorship in Mauritius, the local authority did not turn
towards a court to obtain the "censorship" order. I do not know of
anyone who challenged a censorship incident as suppression of free
speech at the level of Mauritian courts.
Few months ago a policy proposal was made within the AFRINIC community
to address internet shutdowns & censorship. What are your thoughts on
https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2017/006735.html?
Regards,
Ish Sookun
Received on Mon Sep 11 2017 - 16:00:24 PST