![](/images/main_logo.png)
The President addressed the Parliament after the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections on 4th June 2009. She also addressed Parliament on 22nd February 2010, as well as on 21st February 2011. The tables below highlight some items from the agenda of the central government as outlined in these speeches, as well as the initiatives undertaken with respect to these agenda items. Table 1: Some Items from the President’s Address to Parliament on 4th June 2009
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Establishment of National Counter-Terrorism Centre | Proposed launch of NCTC in March 2011 on hold |
Enactment of legislation for prevention of communal violence | Communal Violence Bill 2005 pending in Parliament. New bill drafted by NAC but not introduced in Parliament |
Unique Identity Card scheme to be implemented in three years | Unique Identification Authority of India created under Planning Commission on 28 January 2009. Bill to give statutory status pending in Parliament |
Establishment of a regulator for the pension sector | Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 24 March 2011 |
Convergence of NREGA with other programs; expansion of works permitted; independent monitoring and grievance redressal | |
Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana to cover all families below the poverty line in five years | |
Enactment of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Bill | Bill passed in 2009 and brought into force on 1 April 2009 |
Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan to universalize access to secondary education | Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan launched in March 2009 |
National Mission for Female Literacy to make every woman literate in five years | National Literacy Mission recast in 2009 to focus on female literacy |
Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses under Indira Awas Yojana in five years | |
Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for slum dwellers and urban poor | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
Enactment of National Food Security Act | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Enactment of Amendment Bill to Land Acquisition Act and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill | Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 7 September 2011 |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha, pending in Lok Sabha |
Constitutional Amendment for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
Amendment of RTI to provide for disclosure by government in all non-strategic areas | |
Model Public Services Law to be drawn up in consultation with states | Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievance Bill, 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 20 December 2011 |
Introduction of Goods and Services Tax | Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 March 2011 |
National Council for Human Resources in Health | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
National Council for Higher Education | Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
*Note: Blank cells indicate that PRS has not been able to find official information in the public domain. Table 2: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 22nd February 2010
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Introduction of legislation to ensure food security | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for urban poor and slum dwellers | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
Disposal of remaining claims under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act | |
Introduction of amendment to the Wakf Act | Passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
Enactment of Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 | Pending in Rajya Sabha since 2005 |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
Constitutional amendments for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
Establishment of National Council for Higher Education and Research | Higher Education and Research Bill, 2011 introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
Legislation for facilitating participation of foreign academic institutions in the education sector | Foreign Educational Institutions Bill, 2010 introduced in Lok Sabha on 3 May 2010 |
Voting rights for Indian citizens living abroad | Bill passed. NRIs can vote at the place of residence that is mentioned in their passport |
Table 3: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 21st February 2011
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Enactment of Food Security Law | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Whistleblower Bill | Bill passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
Enactment of Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 1 December 2010 |
Enactment of new Mines and Minerals Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 12 December 2011 |
Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses during 2009-14 | |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
Introduction of Bill regarding protection of children from sexual offences | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 23 March 2011 |
Introduction of Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill | Not introduced till date |
A few minutes ago, the Supreme Court delivered a judgement striking down Section 66 A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This was in response to a PIL that challenged the constitutionality of this provision. In light of this, we present a background to Section 66 A and the recent developments leading up to its challenge before the Court. What does the Information Technology Act, 2000 provide for? The Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 provides for legal recognition for transactions through electronic communication, also known as e-commerce. The Act also penalizes various forms of cyber crime. The Act was amended in 2009 to insert a new section, Section 66A which was said to address cases of cyber crime with the advent of technology and the internet. What does Section 66(A) of the IT Act say? Section 66(A) of the Act criminalises the sending of offensive messages through a computer or other communication devices. Under this provision, any person who by means of a computer or communication device sends any information that is:
Over the past few years, incidents related to comments, sharing of information, or thoughts expressed by an individual to a wider audience on the internet have attracted criminal penalties under Section 66(A). This has led to discussion and debate on the ambit of the Section and its applicability to such actions. What have been the major developments in context of this Section? In the recent past, a few arrests were made under Section 66(A) on the basis of social media posts directed at notable personalities, including politicians. These were alleged to be offensive in nature. In November 2012, there were various reports of alleged misuse of the law, and the penalties imposed were said to be disproportionate to the offence. Thereafter, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court, challenging this provision on grounds of unconstitutionality. It was said to impinge upon the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. How has the government responded so far? Subsequently, the central government issued guidelines for the purposes of Section 66(A). These guidelines clarified that prior approval of the Deputy Commissioner or Inspector General of Police was required before a police officer or police station could register a complaint under Section 66(A). In May 2013, the Supreme Court (in relation to the above PIL) also passed an order saying that such approval was necessary before any arrest is to be made. Since matters related to police and public order are dealt with by respective state governments, a Supreme Court order was required for these guidelines to be applicable across the country. However, no changes have been made to Section 66 A itself. Has there been any legislative movement with regard to Section 66(A)? A Private Member Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha in 2013 to amend Section 66(A) of the IT Act. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill stated that most of the offences that Section 66(A) dealt with were already covered by the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860. This had resulted in dual penalties for the same offence. According to the Bill, there were also inconsistencies between the two laws in relation to the duration of imprisonment for the same offence. The offence of threatening someone with injury through email attracts imprisonment of two years under the IPC and three years under the IT Act. The Bill was eventually withdrawn. In the same year, a Private Members resolution was also moved in Parliament. The resolution proposed to make four changes: (i) bring Section 66(A) in line with the Fundamental Rights of the Constitution; (ii) restrict the application of the provision to communication between two persons; (iii) precisely define the offence covered; and (iv) reduce the penalty and make the offence a non-cognizable one (which means no arrest could be made without a court order). However, the resolution was also withdrawn. Meanwhile, how has the PIL proceeded? According to news reports, the Supreme Court in February, 2015 had stated that the constitutional validity of the provision would be tested, in relation to the PIL before it. The government argued that they were open to amend/change the provision as the intention was not to suppress freedom of speech and expression, but only deal with cyber crime. The issues being examined by the Court relate to the powers of the police to decide what is abusive, causes annoyance, etc,. instead of the examination of the offence by the judiciary . This is pertinent because this offence is a cognizable one, attracting a penalty of at least three years imprisonment. The law is also said to be ambiguous on the issue of what would constitute information that is “grossly offensive,” as no guidelines have been provided for the same. This lack of clarity could lead to increased litigation. The judgement is not available in the public domain yet. It remains to be seen on what the reasoning of the Supreme Court was, in its decision to strike down Section 66A, today.