Kerala HC seeks govt’s views — Plea for specialised mechanism to prevent cyberbullying

Kerala HC seeks govt's views — Plea for specialised mechanism to prevent cyberbullying

Kochi : The high court has directed the state govt to file an affidavit within two weeks on a PIL seeking a coordinated state-level mechanism to prevent and investigate serious cases of cyberbullying, cyberstalking, online harassment and the circulation of morphed or manipulated images and other forms of technology-facilitated abuse.

The bench recorded the submission and posted the petition to Nov 11. She also sought the creation of a preventive monitoring wing within the proposed SIT or mechanism to monitor social media trends, identify patterns of coordinated harassment and detect high-risk digital environments to prevent suicides and self-harm linked to online abuse, subject to constitutional safeguards and the restrictions under Article 19(2). A bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V M Syam Kumar issued the directive on a PIL filed by Pooja Maheswar of Maradu in Ernakulam. When the petition came up for hearing, the additional advocate general submitted that instructions had been received and a detailed affidavit would be filed. The petitioner sought a directive to the state govt and the state police chief to constitute a special investigation team (SIT) or a coordinated state-level investigative mechanism under the supervision of an officer of appropriate seniority to effectively investigate serious and recurring cases of technology-facilitated abuse. Victims facing sustained and escalating online abuse may have to approach local police, specialised cyber units, grievance mechanisms of online platforms and other authorities separately, even when the harassment occurs simultaneously across multiple platforms or jurisdictions. She contended that examining individual posts, messages or complaints in isolation could also prevent investigators from identifying a larger, coordinated pattern of harassment.

The existing institutional response leaves a gap between general cyber-awareness and cybercrime-prevention initiatives, on the one hand, and conventional criminal investigation, on the other, according to the petitioner.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *