Thousands join mass hunger strike in Assam against Citizenship Bill
Guwahati, May 29: Thousands of persons participated in a mass hunger strike here on Tuesday to protest against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016.
The protest at the Assam Engineering College ground in Chandmari area was led by the All Assam Students Union and supported by at least 28 other organisations, including the Asom Gana Parishad, a partner of the BJP-led government in Assam, and the Congress.
"Assam is not a dumping ground. We have registered our protests against the bill several times. We will not accept it at any cost," AASU Adviser Samujjal Bhattacharyya said while addressing the gathering at the protest site.
Protests have become the order of the day in Assam since a Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016 visited the state this month.
"The infiltration from Bangladesh has impacted the demographics in Assam. The central and Assam governments must respect the Assam Accord, which clearly said that the cut-off date for identification and deportation of Bangladeshis is the midnight of March 24, 1971," Bhattacharyya said and warned of a massive agitation in case the Centre and state went ahead with the passage and implementation of the bill.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bombay High Court strikes down Centre's plan to set up Fact-Check Unit
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has struck down the central government's plan to establish a fact-checking unit (FCU) under the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2023. The decision comes in response to a petition filed by standup comedian Kunal Kamra, challenging the constitutional validity of the Centre's move.
Justice A.S. Chandurkar, delivering the final verdict, declared that the proposed IT Amendment Rules violated key provisions of the Indian Constitution, namely Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), and 19(1)(g) (right to profession).
“I have considered the matter extensively. The impugned rules are violative of Articles 14, 19, and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India,” Justice Chandurkar said in his judgment. He further remarked that terms like "fake, false, and misleading" in the IT Rules were "vague" and lacked a clear definition, making them unconstitutional.
This judgment followed a split verdict issued by a division bench of the Bombay High Court in January. The bench, consisting of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale, was divided in their opinions. While Justice Patel ruled that the IT Rules amounted to censorship and struck them down, Justice Gokhale upheld the rules, arguing that they did not pose a "chilling effect" on free speech, as the petitioners had claimed.
The matter was then referred to a third judge, leading to today's decision. The Supreme Court had previously stayed the Centre's notification that would have made the fact-checking unit operational, stating that the government could not proceed until the Bombay High Court ruled on the case.
Kunal Kamra and other petitioners had argued that the amendments posed unreasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression. They contended that the provisions would lead to government-led censorship, effectively granting the government unchecked powers to determine what constitutes 'truth' online. The petitioners further claimed that such powers would turn the government into "prosecutor, judge, and executioner" in matters of online content.
With the Bombay High Court’s ruling, the Centre's move to create fact-checking units has been effectively halted, reaffirming the importance of protecting freedom of speech and expression in the digital space.
