Centre for Internet and Society

Global Challenges to Freedom of Expression

praskrishna — 2011-04-04T07:17:59Z

The Centre for Culture, Media & Governance, Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi, Human Rights Law Network, Delhi and the Centre for Internet & Society, Bangalore are pleased to invite you to a public lecture by Mr. Frank La Rue, President of the Central American Institute for Studies of Social Democracy and UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression on March 4, 2011, 6 pm at the Constitutional Club in New Delhi.

Frank La Rue

Mr. La Rue is the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. He has worked on human rights for the past 25 years. He is the founder of the Centre for Legal Action for Human Rights (CALDH), both in Washington DC and Guatemala, which became the first Guatemalan NGO to bring cases of human rights violations to the Inter-American System. CALDH was also the first Guatemalan NGO to promote economic, social and cultural rights. Mr. La Rue also brought the first genocide case against the military dictatorship in Guatemala. As a human rights activist, his name was presented to the Nobel Peace Prize committee in 2004.

La Rue has previously served as a Presidential Commissioner for Human Rights in Guatemala, as a Human Rights Adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guatemala and as a consultant to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. He is President of Instituto Demos in Guatemala City. La Rue holds a BA in Legal and Social Sciences from the University of San Carlos, Guatemala and a postgraduate degree in U.S. foreign policy from Johns Hopkins University.

The entrance is free. Refreshments will be served from 5.30 pm onwards.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/global-freedom-expression

Design!publiC

praskrishna — 2011-06-03T13:27:22Z

The Centre for Internet and Society in partnership with Centre for Knowledge Societies, Venkataramanan Associates, Centre for Law and Policy Research and LiveMint is organising Design!publiC on March 18, 2011. Design Public is a conversation about whether and how to bring design thinking to bear upon the challenges of government so as to promote governance innovation.

Background

The problem of governance is perhaps as old as society, as old as the rule of law. But it is only more recently -- perhaps the last five hundred years of modernity -- that human societies have been able to conceive of different models of government, different modalities of public administration, all having different effects on the configuration of society. The problem of governments, of governmentality, and of governance is always also the problem of how to change the very processes and procedures of government, so as to enhance the ends of the state and to promote the collective good.

Since the establishment of India’s republic, many kinds of changes have been made to the policies and practices of its state. We may think of, for instance, successive stages of land reforms, the privatization of large-scale and extractive industries, the subsequent abolition of the License Raj and so and so forth. We may also consider the computerization of state documents beginning in the 1980s, and more recently, the Right To Information Act (RTI). More recently there have been activist campaigns to reduce the discretionary powers of government and to thereby reduce the scope of corruption in public life.

While all these cases represent the continuous process of modification, reform, and change to government policy and even to its modes of functioning, this is not what we have in mind when we speak of ‘governance innovation.’ Rather, intend a specific process of ethnographic inquiry into the real needs of citizens, followed by an inclusive approach to reorganizing and representing that information in such a way that it may promote collaborative problem-solving and solutioneering through the application of design thinking.

The concept of design thinking has emerged only recently, and it has been used to describe approaches to problem solving that include: (i) redefining the fundamental challenges at hand, (ii) evaluating multiple possible options and solutions in parallel, and (iii) prioritizing and selecting those which are likely to achieve the greatest benefits for further consideration. This approach may also be iterative, allowing decisions to be made in general and specific ways as an organization gets closer and closer to the solution. Design thinking turns out to be not an individual but collective and social process, requiring small and large groups to be able to work together in relation to the available information about the task or challenge at hand. Design thinking can lead to innovative ideas, to new insights, and to new actionable directions for organizations.

This general approach to innovation -- and the central role of design thinking -- has emerged from the private sector over the last quarter century, and has enjoyed particular success in regards to the development of new technology products, services and experience. The question we would like to address in this conference is whether and how this approach can be employed for the transformation public and governmental systems.

What is the Evidence that Design Thinking Positively Impacts Governments?

Many European countries have government-supported design conglomerations for the purposes of enhancing business and the government’s interface with the public. Design Council in the UK not only works to create public identities but also helps formulate national design strategies that help the United Kingdom to differentiate its national brand and achieve broad national benefits. Elsewhere in the UK, a private organization, Think Public, and various governmental agencies, are working through a consultative approach with citizens to better target governmental services so as to maximize citizen benefits.

In the context of public health, the first major public health information system has been built in Canada, and in many ways it may serve as a reference and benchmark for other countries around the world. The first deployment of a public health information system in developing country contexts is in Ghana, where a specialized Resource Center is even now being conceived to enable the support and further development of this new system.

In India, early innovation research and concept development activities by the Center for Knowledge Societies for the Gates Foundation has shown promising results in terms of new opportunities to enhance the quality of health care delivery through the Bihar pilot itself, using the tools and techniques of ethnography, design, and user experience enhancement. In its studios in New Delhi and Bangalore, it has hosted innovation workshops with international health experts, public officials and other stakeholders to envision new kinds of technologies and solutions for improving public health delivery. In future, it may be possible to organize these kinds of efforts in the form of an Innovation Lab or Innovation Center.

Whereas, in the past, diverse attempts have been made to reform government, to make it more efficient, to reduce corruption and the arbitrariness of decisioning authority. Beneficial as these approaches may have been, they have not always been successful in fundamentally transforming the ways in which bureaucracies think about their mission, objectives and goals. They have not resulted in greater consumer orientation of these cadres, or greater public participation in the decision-making of these bureaucracies. These are the kinds of benefits that design thinking can bring to governmental and quasi-governmental bureaucracies.

In this conclave, our interest is to explore how design thinking and user-centered innovation might help such organizations better accomplish their mission and better serve their beneficiaries. We also seek to explore and establish particular modalities through which governance innovation can be achieved, as well as to identify key stakeholders and personalities gripped of the challenge of governance innovation. Our larger goal is to craft a path forward for integrating design thinking and innovation methodologies in the further re-envisioning, refashioning and improvement of public services in India and elsewhere in the world.

Specific Expected Outcomes

A shared understanding and common vocabulary around design thinking and innovation
A review of insights and outcomes from the event by members of government with a view to routinizing and institutionalizing innovation in government
A documentation of case-studies, concepts and perspectives from different participants emerging from the conclave
An emerging community of thinkers and practitioners interested in working together to share information and insights to accelerate governance innovation
A consensus on the modalities and occasion for the conduct of a follow-up conclave, possibly in Bangalore as soon as September 2011

An Invitation to Dialogue

Design Public is a conversation among a select group of high level thinkers and actors who care about public services design. No more than 50 persons will be in attendance. Presentations will be brief. Panel discussants will intersperse with the other participants for greater involvement and equal opportunity for dialogue and response. All attendees will be asked to participate in the emerging dialogue through the day.

Draft Schedule

10.00 am
What do Designers do? How can Physical, Informational and Interaction Design Impact the Everyday Life of Citizens?

Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society (Moderator)
Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Socities
Abhimanyu Kulkarni, Design Director, Philips Design
Younghee Jung, Senior Designer, Nokia Corporation
Daniela Sangiorgi, Lecturer, Lancaster University
Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Founder, Centre for Law and Policy Research
Naresh Narasimhan, Principal Architect, VA Group

11.00 am

How Can the Government Best Use Designers and Design Thinking?

Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies (Moderator)
Niels Hansen, Project Manager, MindLab
Aparna Piramal Raje, Design Thinker, Mint
Anant Shah, Program Officer, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Harsh Shrivastava, Consultant (Planning), Planning Commission of India
Kiran Dhingra, Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation
Shubhagato Dasgupta, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Research
Steven Solnik, Member-Government Performance and Accountability, Ford Foundation

12.00 pm

How can Social / Media Promote Design and Governance Innovation?

Suresh Venkat, Executive Producer, CNBC TV18 (Moderator)
Vibodh Parthasarthy, Associate Professor, Jamia Milia Islamia
Yatish Rajawat, Editor-in-Chief, Business Bhaskar
R. Sukumar, Editor, Mint
Sashwati Banerjee, Executive Director, Sesame Workshop India
Aditya Mishra, Founder, Headstart Foundation

1.00 pm

Working and Networking Lunch

2.00 pm

Innovation Workshopping Breakout Sessions

Track One:

Conducting Ethnography to Inform the Innovation Process

The group is responsible for coming up with an innovative approach to curbing power theft in peri-urban locations in India. Many factors are responsible for this phenomenon. What questions will you ask and how will you collect information on the ground to inform any future innovations you might come up with? (Case Study subject to change)
Brainstorming and Concepting in Response to Ethnographic Data

The group is responsible for conceptualizing a new ways to promote maternal and child health using mobile devices. Data on this question has already been collected and will be shown to you in the form of a brief presentation. You must come up with as many different ideas or concepts as possible using post-its. Then you must prioritize these concepts and vote on the ones you would like to see implemented. (Case Study subject to change)
Approaches to Institutionalizing Innovation in Government

This group will consider ways and means for accelerating and institutionalizing innovation in governance, through for example, the provision of knowledge, best practices, support, training, and organizational change. Ideas may include, but not be restricted to new kinds of handbooks, online sources, academic and applied training and other ideas. Approaches should be evaluated and prioritized prior to presentation back to the group.

4.30 pm
Team Presentations (over tea served at tables)

5.00 pm
What institutional and organizational models can best foster Governance Innovation?

Amit Garg, Director, MXV Consulting (Moderator)
Arun Maira, Member, Planning Commission & Member, National Innovation Council
R. Gopalakrishnan, Member Secretary, National Innovation Council
Mohammad Haleem Khan, Director, CAPART
D S Ravindran, CEO, Center of e-Governance, Government of Karnataka
Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies

Other Notable Discussants and Interactants

Anil Khachi, Deputy Director General, UIDAI
Narahari Mahato, Member of Parliament, AIFB
N. Cheluvaraya Swamy, Member of Parliament, JD(S)
Syed Azeez Pasha, Member of Parliament, CPI
Moinul Hassan, Member of Parliament, CPM
Amit Garg, Director, MXV Consulting
William Bissell, Managing Director, FabIndia
Kalpana Awasthi, Officer on Special Duty (OSD) to Sam Pitroda
Abhimanyu Kulkarni, Design Director, Philips Design
D. Raja, Member of Parliament, CPI
Josh Glazeroff, Visa Chief, US Embassy
Pooja Sood, Curator and Director, Khoj Foundation
Ravina Agarwal, Program Officer, Ford Foundation
Nita Soans, Advisor, Center for Knowledge Societies
Ekta Ohri, Head of Project Operations, Center for Knowledge Societies

Individual Participation

In order to make each voice count, entry to the conclave will be by arrangement only. Others who are truly interested, should please drop us a few lines on how they would like to contribute and we will be glad to get back in touch.

There are no registration fees. However, we would like to see participants take their own initiative in covering their own travel costs and making their own arrangements for stay so far as possible. If specific needs are perceived, please communicate them to the organizers.

Institutional Participation

Confederations of industry, associations of management, departments of government and diverse development sector and civil society organizations are invited to express their interest in supporting this event.

Organizers

Center for Knowledge Societies (CKS)
Center for Internet and Society (CIS)

Sponsors

Venkatramanan Associates (VA)
Center for Law and Policy (CLP)

Date and Venue
The date for the event has been decided for Friday, the 18th of March, 2011. It will be held at the Taj Vivanta in Central Delhi.

Thought Leadership and Dialogue
Dr. Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies
aditya@cks.in

Naresh Narasimhan, Principal, VA Associates
naresh@vagroup.com

Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Founder, Center for Law and Policy
sudhir.krishnaswamy@ashiralaw.co.in

Participation Enquiries

Sumeet Malhotra, Business Development Manager
sumeet@cks.in

Download the book here [PDF, 2.8 MB]
Download the case studies here [PDF, 641 KB]
Download the glossary here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/design-public

The Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010: Does it exceed its Mandate in Including Provisions Relating to Other Disability Legislations?

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:32:18Z

The Centre for Internet and Society, Inclusive Planet and the Centre for Law and Policy Research in this legal note analyse how far the January draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act touches upon the provisions of the other disability legislations, namely the Mental Health Act and The National Trusts Act and thereby exceeds the mandate given by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to amend only the Persons with Disabilities Act.

Introduction

This is a brief Note on the Working Draft of the Persons with Disabilities Act dated 1.12.2010 (“Working Draft”) on the specific issue of how it relates to the three other disability legislations being the National Trusts Act 1999, the Mental Health Act 1987 and the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992.

From the Working Draft it is seen that there are several provisions which are contradictory to some of the provisions in these three legislations in significant ways. This Note also raises concerns as to whether the Working Draft has exceeded its mandate given by the Committee to only amend the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (“PWD Act”) by attempting to draft a comprehensive disability law which includes even the other disability legislations .

The Committee and its Mandate

The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, through an Office Memorandum1, constituted a Committee to “draft a new legislation to replace the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995” (“Committee”). 2 The main aim of setting up the Committee was to ensure that the PWD Act was in consonance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and not to amend any of the other disability legislations. 3

After the Committee was set up, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee dated 22-07-2010 4 show that the Chairperson reminded the Committee members of the specific purpose for which it was set up and was therefore “not going to debate on formulating one comprehensive law that would repeal all other current disability legislations such as The National Trust Act, Mental Health Act and Rehabilitation Council of India Act, etc.”5

Subsequently, the Consultant appointed by the Committee released several drafts and the latest Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010 is dated 01.12.2010(“Working Draft”). 6 The Working Draft surprisingly states that “the mandate of the Committee to the Consultant was to put together a comprehensive legislation which covers all rights of all persons with disabilities.” 7

Further, the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Working Draft proposes to “replace the current disability legislations with a comprehensive law which recognizes all rights of all persons with disabilities.” 8

These statements in the Working Draft raise some confusion as to whether the mandate given by the Committee has been clearly understood before the drafting process commenced. If the mandate was indeed to only amend the PWD Act and not to amend any of the other legislations such as the National Trusts Act, the Mental Health Act and the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, then the drafting should have been restricted to amending the PWD Act to the extent possible, and not to affect the provisions of the other legislations.

The Working Draft on Other Disability Legislations

The Working Draft does not suggest any amendments to the other disability legislations such as the National Trust Act, 1999, Mental Health Act, 1987 and Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992. However, as to the effect that the Working Draft should have on these other legislations, it leaves a “Pending Question” which states9:

“The issue of the induction of the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council as separate chapters could not be attempted primarily because there was no time left to undertake a coherent and systematic exercise. It may also be noted that as the length of the statute expanded we felt a constraint of space in even incorporating all the provisions of power and accountability in the chapter on the Disability Rights Authority. It may also be noted that all significant authorities in the country have dedicated legislations around them. In this view of the matter the Committee would need to consider whether it would wish to suggest the creation of One Disability Law Code and within which have legislations on : Disability Rights; the Disability Authority; the National Trust; and the Rehabilitation Council. Or whether it would also wish to induct the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council into this legislation?”

Added to this, the Memorandum on Disability Code (“Memorandum”) prepared along with the Working Draft explains that the reasons mentioned in the Pending Question along with the lack of time prevented the working out of the linkages between the DRA, the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council of India.10

About the other dedicated legislations, the Memorandum states as follows11:

“Since we reached the opinion that the newly established DRA should have its own legislation we also concluded that the National Trust and the RCI should have their own legislations which should spell out the specific tasks each of those authorities should carry out to implement the rights recognized in the New Rights for Persons with Disabilities Act. The National Trust should be the authority which addresses the issue of multiple discrimination and be mandated to proactively formulate policies and programs by which to ensure the equality and non discrimination of persons with disabilities who are so disadvantaged and the RCI could work on HRD. The composition and powers and functions of the three bodies should be so created that it ensures convergence of operation.”

With regard to the Mental Health Act, the Memorandum makes the following recommendation12

“The proposed new law recognizes the paradigm of legal capacity with support. It also recognizes the right to life, liberty and integrity of all persons with disabilities. The recognition of these rights requires a re-examination of the Mental Health Act. Even if it is accepted that community living and no force are what is required for all; it is necessary to ask what should be done with the existing institutions and the inmates housed in them. The process of dismantling cannot be done without creating alternative services and there is a need to make a transit legislation which addresses this interim situation. The reason for making the transit legislation comes from the main law but to allow coherent operation and efficient implementation of these transitory measures it is better that they are contained in a separate legislation.”

These statements in the Explanatory Notes to the Working Draft shows that it not restricted itself to only amending the PWD Act as envisaged by the Mandate given by the Committee. An examination of the Working Draft shows that it has neither completely substituted the provisions of the three other disability legislations into the Working Draft, nor has it restricted itself to amending only the PWD Act - it is somewhere in the middle, where some many provisions which are covered by the three other disability legislations are significantly altered and at the same time these legislations are not sought to be amended simultaneously.

If the intention of the Working Draft is to replace all the other disability legislations, then it clearly exceeds the mandate of the Committee.

Section 7A(2) of the Working Draft

Section 7A (2) and 7B (2) in the Working Draft are included only within the chapter relating to Legal Capacity. They are phrased unusually to render any legislation, rule, notification, order, bye-law, regulation, custom and practice that deprive a person with disability from exercising his legal capacity as void.

Such a provision in one statute which declares a provision in another statute as void may not even be constitutionally permissible. The function of the legislature is to enact, re-enact, amend and repeal laws. The judiciary under Article 13 of the Constitution can exercise its powers of judicial review to render a provision which infringes on the fundamental rights as void. The legislature however, has no such power.

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in P.L. Mehra and Ors v. D.R. Khanna and Ors (AIR 1971 Delhi 1) held as follows:
“…the decision in Mahendra Lal Jaini's case, as to the nature of a statute becoming void under Article 13 confirms the view that the statute itself continues to exist on the statute book but has become "ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect". The thrust of these words is that such a law cannot be given effect to by the Courts in deciding upon the rights of the parties. These words are significant only for the purposes of the Courts vis-a-vis the rights of the parties. They would be meaningless if applied to the power of the Legislature to re-enact, repeal or amend a statute. For, one can hardly say that these powers of the Legislature cannot be exercised in respect of a statute which is ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect. Indeed, it would be all the more necessary for the Legislature to amend or cure statutes which are suffering from such defects. The nature of the defects is such that only a judicial decision can point them out. It is not by an act of Legislature but only by a judicial decision that one would know whether a statute is ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect.”

Therefore, the declaration of a statutory provision as ‘void’ can only be done by the judiciary as “voiding” of the law only comes into question at the time of the enforcement or implementation of the law. The legislature’s function is to repair the defect in legislation by amending it or repealing the whole legislation.

The Working Draft, in declaring other legislative provisions as void is being vague as to the specific provisions of specific legislations which are to fall under the Section. The Working Draft cannot make a blanket declaration of all laws inconsistent with legal capacity as void without taking steps to identify the provisions and make amendments or deletions.

Effect of the Working Draft without amendment of other disability legislations

The provisions of the Working Draft are introduced in such a way as to affect the provisions of the other disability legislations. In light of this, the need for amending the provisions of these disability legislations is a pressing one. The inconsistencies between the Working Draft and the other disability legislations range from the definition of ‘persons with disability’ to the recognition of the basic principle of legal capacity. As detailed in the table, the National Trust Act follows a completely different basis for determining who a ‘person with disability’ is. If the definition is not amended under the National Trust Act, it results in an inconsistency in the language under the various disability legislations.

Further, the Working Draft is not correct in declaring that other legislative provisions which deprive a person of legal capacity as void. Declaration that a provision of law is void is not the function of the legislature. Its function is to adequately amend it so as to be consistent with the principles it intends to introduce and enforce. This applies to the principle of legal capacity which the Working Draft aims to bring into all the disability legislations. In order to do so, it has to amend the Mental Health Act and the National Trust Act accordingly.

The authorities under the various disability legislations have their set functions. However, the Working Draft is uncertain as to how to divide the responsibilities of the various authorities. It does not incorporate the various authorities under the Working Draft provisions itself. However, it encroaches on the powers and functions of those authorities by making the Disability Rights Authority or some other ‘delegated authority’ in charge of them. While doing so, it does not even amend the provisions of the other legislations. This is a serious discrepancy as the enforcement of rights and performance of duties under the legislations. If there is a confusion as to which authority is responsible to perform a specific function, then a person might be deprived of the very rights that the Draft seeks to enforce.

Leaving the other disability provisions unamended leads to an especially difficult situation when the courts have to determine the intention of the legislature while drafting and have to apply that intention while interpreting it. Further, it is not clear as to what rights should be enforced against which authority in court. Therefore, the merging of the areas of function between the various authorities makes the enforcement of rights itself difficult and therefore uncertain.

Conclusion

Thus, as seen from the Working Draft, it is clear that it seeks to be one comprehensive law on disability, which would encompass issues addressed by several other disability laws. The explanatory notes state that it leaves the issue of the DRA and the authorities such as the Rehabilitation Council and the National Trust as a Pending Question.

It also refers to a Disability Code, which would encompass all disability legislation within its framework and raise this as an issue for the Committee to decide, when that has never been the mandate of the Committee. The explanatory notes state that it would bring within its fold all authorities such as the Rehabilitation Council and the National Trust and that the linkages between these authorities and the new Disability Rights Authority set up under the Working Draft would have to be worked out through transit legislation. The Working Draft leaves the discretion to the Committee to come to a conclusion as to whether all the authorities have to be incorporated under the same legislations or a separate Code with all the legislations has to be prepared. Thus, the roles which the authorities have to perform are left uncertain. The Mandate of the Committee was to replace the PWD Act, 1995. Therefore, the powers and functions of authorities which are established under the other disability legislations ought to have been left untouched. Instead, the Working Draft seeks to make a comprehensive legislation covering all the disabilities while it leaves the implementation aspect uncertain and undecided.

These statements along with some of the specific provisions mentioned in the table above show clearly that the Working Draft aims to be some kind of a comprehensive code to bring in all disability legislations within its fold and not only to amend the PWD Act, which was its specific mandate. For these reasons, the Working Draft has exceeded the mandate given to it. This has been suggested even by some members of the Committee. 13

Further, the Working Draft by only including Section 7A(2) in its chapter relating to Legal Capacity, which would render all other legislation in contravention to it as void, is not suitable and adequate. There would be adverse consequences if the other legislations are not suitably amended. For example, the entire Mental Health Act would need an overhaul if the right to legal capacity is introduced in the Working Draft. The local committees set up under the National Trusts Act would have to be completely abolished as their only role is to appoint guardians, which is completely done away with in the Working Draft. Thus, the mere inclusion of Section 7A (2) is not sufficient and workable, nor is it within the powers of the legislature to include.

The Working Draft has listed in Schedule 1 the amendments suggested to other legislations. This Schedule is incomplete and the specific provisions relating to the National Trusts Act 1999, the Rehabilitation Council of India Act 1992 and the Mental Health Act 1987 are also legislations which need amendment and should be included in this Schedule.

It is crucial that there is clarity on these important issues as to what exactly is being proposed to be amended. Whether it is only the PWD that is sought to be replaced or all other disability legislations are to be replaced by a Disability Code need to be understood by the drafters. If the mandate is only to amend the PWD Act, then it is important that we restrict ourselves to this mandate so as to ensure that other disability legislations are not affected. The other legislations can be amended at their own time, after the present PWD Act has been revised as per the mandate of the Committee.

Download the working draft in the format you may prefer:

For word, click here
For pdf, click here

Notes

1GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. DEP’T OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, OFFICE MEMORANDUM FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF A COMMITTEE TO DRAFT A NEW LEGISLATION TO REPLACE THE PWD ACT, 1995., F.No. 16-38/2006-DD.III, (30th April 2010).

2 id

3See id

4See MINUTES OF MEETING, 2ND MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE TO DRAFT NEW LEGISLATION FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES., ( 22nd July 2010).

5See id at Page 1.

6See Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/newlaw.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011).

7See id at Explanatory Note.

8See id at Statement of Objects and Reasons.

9Explanatory Notes: Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act Working Draft, Part IV, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/explanatory-notes.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011)

10See Memorandum on Disability Code, Background, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/bcp-disability-code.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011)

11See id at Dedicated Legislations.

12See id at Transitory Measures

13“Crisis hits panel on new Disability law” Available at http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101224/main5.htm

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/working-draft

2(m) or not 2(m)

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T15:55:48Z

An article by Nilanjana S Roy was published in the Business Standard on February 19, 2011. In this article Nilanjana Roy explains to us how a copyright amendment might change the way we read, write and publish in India.

Call this the war of the slogans. On one side, copyright lawyers and the Ministry of Human Resource Development offer the lure of cheaper books for Indian readers. On the other, publishers and authors speak of the death of Indian publishing as we know it.

Section 2(m), a proposed amendment to India’s copyright law that would allow the parallel import of books, is a dry piece of legalese, but it’s sparked a blog war, a flurry of publisher white papers, and a wide debate on copyright and territory.

The rationale is a legally sound one — to align Indian copyright law with Indian patent and trademark law, both of which follow the principle of “international exhaustion”: once a product has been legitimately sold, that product can be resold anywhere in the world without the consent of the owner of the copyright, be that the author or the publisher.

According to the Association of Publishers of India, “This proviso would mean that books published in any country could be freely made available and sold in India, without this amounting to infringement of copyright.”

Theoretically, parallel imports would allow a publisher or a printer who does not hold copyright to an Indian edition of a book to print his or her own editions of the book, under certain conditions, and release them back into the Indian market. There is also a fear among publishers that this might lead to widespread “dumping”, where the market is flooded with cheap, remaindered books.”

When this applies to books, specifically, one side argues that allowing “parallel imports” of books would open up the Indian publishing market to competition and would allow readers access to cheaper books. The other side argues that authors and publishers would suffer, and that in the long run, so would the reader. Thomas Abraham, managing director, Hachette India, states his position succinctly: “This would be the death of publishing and writing as we know it in India — and ironically by a surfeit of books.”

Step back from the rhetoric and the very complex issues involved about the intricacies of copyright law, territoriality in publishing, the book remainders market and book dumping, and here’s how the amendment is likely to affect readers, authors, publishers and booksellers.

Booksellers

Perhaps the sharpest summary comes from Landmark Bookstore’s Madhu Mohan: “As booksellers, we want to give our customers a wider range at a lower price. An open market immediately affords both: the cost of this is that publishers with Indian market rights might suffer. The more significantly affected parties are authors, publishers and readers. If, arguably, territorial rights are not sold, authors might earn lower advances. Publishers who have paid for territorial rights, are not able to get the full benefit of their monies. Readers should welcome the change, because at the outset they will get lower priced books.”

His view is echoed across the bookselling industry, with reactions ranging from indifference to the possible repercussions to cautious alarm — for many booksellers, a weak or damaged Indian publishing industry is also a negative.

Almost all booksellers agree that the short-term benefits of allowing parallel imports would be to lower the price of books. India already has among the lowest-priced English language books in the world, but it would be interesting to see if even lower prices reeled in a different kind of reader. As Mohan points out, book imports would be cheaper; books published in India by Indian or foreign authors would be adversely affected. The long-term scenario is another matter; if the Indian publishing industry is hit hard, we could be flooded with cheap, low-quality remainders, or lose price benefits in the long run.

Authors

For authors, what’s key about the 2(m) amendment is the way in which it would affect the writer’s copyright over his/ her work — and also the shifts it might bring about in the industry in general. Copyright lawyer Nandita Saikia observes that once a publisher effectively loses control over an edition of a book — if competing editions are allowed into the market — “This would significantly diminish the ability of publishers to invest in Indian authors and Indian writing.” From Abraham at Hachette to Chiki Sarkar at Random House to Tata McGraw Hill, there seems to be consensus on this aspect of the amendment.

In contrast, Pranesh Prakash of the Centre for Internet and Society argues strongly in favour of 2(m) and dismantling the “licence raj” that requires booksellers and distributors to have authorisation to import books: “Allowing people to import goods without permissions (with appropriate duties) is taken for granted in all other areas, so why not copyrighted works? After all, it is not the act of publication that gets affected, but the right of exclusive distribution.”

But many authors point out that publishing and bookselling operate differently from other industries, and the dynamics of writing and bookselling are not comparable. Author Amit Varma puts forward the writer’s objections: “As the author of a book, I should have the right to assign the rights to sell my book to any publisher in India that I feel like, and the law should protect that right, and my contract with the publisher. Parallel import obviously makes a mockery of that right, and can deny me significant potential royalties.”

Publishers

At Penguin India, Andrew Phillips is blunt: “We stand firmly against the amendment. Penguin is both a ‘foreign’ publisher and an Indian publisher and we believe it will affect both parts of our business. We don’t believe the effects will be minor — to the contrary, this would have a fundamental impact on the publishing business both for international authors and Indian authors who aspire to be read outside India.”

The publishers’ arguments are complex, but stripped of the technicalities, they rest on the question of territoriality. When publishing worldwide operates on the basis of territorial agreements — authors sell rights to their works for specific regions — opening up the market unilaterally makes little sense. India might open its market, via 2(m), to competing imports and editions; but Indian publishers don’t have the right to sell similar editions of books in the UK or US markets.

In other words, the market would open up only in one direction — and this could diminish Indian publishers’ ability to nurture new writing, release Indian editions of foreign authors, and pay authors significant royalties.

Behind the rhetoric, nothing about this proposed change in copyright laws is simple, and the repercussions for authors and publishers are likely to be both significant and adverse. There’s an interesting parallel in the Australian market, which, like the Indian publishing industry, is thriving but relatively young, and lacks the clout of the formidable US, UK and European markets.

Two years ago, when the move to allow parallel imports of books was discussed in Australia, that discussion was fierce, impassioned and hotly contested. Nor was it limited to the industry; when readers realised that the debate was really over what they would get to read, which authors would benefit or lose out, and how this would impact their intellectual lives, the debate went public.

In the case of Australia, it took a full year of discussion before it was finally decided not to introduce parallel imports for the publishing industry. Whatever the possible adverse effects — or benefits — of parallel imports, we haven’t had that discussion yet in India. It’s a necessary one, and it affects anybody equipped with a mind, a wallet and the ability to walk into a bookstore. This would be a good time to have it, before the law is set in stone.

The original article was published by Business Standard.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/copyright-amendment

Role of the Internet in Fostering Freedom of Expression and Strengthening Activism in India - A Workshop in Delhi

praskrishna — 2011-04-04T07:18:10Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (India) and the Central American Institute for Studies of Social Democracy DEMOS (Guatemala) have the pleasure to invite you to a day-long workshop on the role of the Internet in fostering freedom of expression and strengthening activism in India. The workshop will take place in the Constitution Club in Delhi on 4 March 2011.

With the significant role reported for new technologies in recent revolutions in Tunesia, Egypt, and elsewhere, activists in India, too, have taken a renewed interest in the potential of the Internet to support their struggles for social change and social justice. But what are some of the potential stumble blocks activists in India might run into in their exploration of the Internet's potential? What are the legal restrictions and frameworks activists should be aware of when they use new technologies in their work? And what can we do to create an environment in which the online world unequivocally supports efforts for greater democratisation and social justice offline, rather than thwart them?

It is questions such as these that this workshop seeks to answer, through a mix of panel discussions, unconference sessions, a film screening, and technical and legal clinics in its day-long program.

Our hope is that the workshop will help participants as well as organisers to get a stronger sense of the potential and challenges of online activism in the particular context of India, as well as to start building stronger networks among the activists interested in these issues in the country.

Participation in the workshop is free. However, we would be grateful if you could confirm your attendance by emailing Anja Kovacs at "anja at cisindia dot org", ideally by 2 March.

We hope you will join us to contribute your own insights and experiences as well as to learn from others about this important new arena of activists' work.

Looking forward to welcoming you at the workshop!

The Agenda

9.30-9.45: Welcome and introductions

9.45-10.15:   Introduction to the Internet and freedom of expression
   By Frank La Rue, President of the Central American Institute for Studies of Social Democracy
   and UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression and Opinion

10.15-10.45: Film screening: “Brave New Medium”
   By Delhi-based docu film maker Subasri Krishnan
   The film addresses Internet and censorship in South-East Asia
   while raising pertinent questions about the implications of this lessons for Indian activists,
   and will be screened in the presence of the filmmaker.

10.45-11.30: Unconference: Online challenges and ways forward for Indian activists:
where are we today and what to do next?
Small group discussion sessions, as per the priorities of the participants

11.30-11.50: Tea/Coffee Break

11.50-12.40: Reporting back and plenary discussion: Challenges for freedom of expression on
the Internet in India and abroad: legal framework, ground realities, alternative visions
With national and international activists, lawyers and researchers as additional resource persons

12.40-13.00: Consultation: Can a global “Internet Bill of Rights” help?
With Lisa Horner, Dynamic Coalition on Internet Rights and Principles of the UN Internet
Governance Forum

13.00 - 14.00: Lunch Break (lunch will be provided)

14.00 - 15.30: Parallel sessions:

legal clinic with a representative from Google and human rights lawyers – to answer any legal question regarding freedom of expression online you may have
technical clinic with a representative from Tactical Tech – to explore the significance of terms like
“Tor” and “proxy” and ways in which you can stay safe and secure online at all times.
If you have a laptop, bring it if you intend to attend this session!

15.30 - 16.15: Strategies for the way forward

Moderated by Mr Frank La Rue

16.15-16.30 : Closing remarks

16.30 - 17.00: Tea/Coffee

Followed by a public lecture by Mr. Frank La Rue at 6 pm, at the same venue, on Global Challenges to Freedom of Expression. Entrance free. All welcome.

Information about the Organisers

The Centre for Internet and Society

The Centre for Internet and Society is located in Bangalore, India. It critically engages with concerns of digital pluralism and public accountability in the field of Internet and Society, with particular emphasis on South-South dialogues and exchange. Through multidisciplinary research, intervention, and collaboration, it seeks to explore, understand, and affect the shape and form of the internet, and its relationship with the political, cultural, and social milieu of our times.

DEMOS Institute

The Demos Institute, based in Guatemala, is a research centre that promotes democratic alternatives for Guatemala, under the human rights framework. Within DEMOS, there is a research team which supports the mandate of Frank La Rue, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, in the making of his annual reports before the United Nations Human Rights Council.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/fostering-freedom-of-expression

Pull the Plug

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:21:16Z

Is it time to start talking about the right to disconnect? There is so much expectation and focus on being connected to the internet, that it seems like we don't have a choice. This article by Nishant Shah was published in the Indian Express.

W e hear a lot about how the internet should be considered as one of the basic human rights. As more of the world gets connected through the World Wide Web, and information becomes the new capital, there is a digital divide that emerges between those who can surf the web with ease, and those who struggle to boot their computers.

It is assumed that the digital natives are wired and connected, with their fingers constantly swooping on gadgets and their eyes glued to the interfaces at their disposal. They communicate with each other but also with the world around them through their tech tools, with the world just a click away. It is also assumed that for most digital natives, this existence in a surfeit of information and action is a default mode of being -that even when they are asleep, their digital selves are interacting in social networking systems, their gadgets are harvesting information from the Web, and their personal communication tools are bombarded with messages that are queued up for them to read when they wake up.

This constantly connected future is fuelled by governments and markets who are offering greater access to the young, both for education and consumption. Projects like the US-based One Laptop Per Child and mobile phones targeted at a "tweenage" demography are testimonies to how the younger generation is at the centre of this digital matrix of information communication.

In her book Alone Together, Sherry Turkle, professor at MIT, talks about how readers who are bombarded by snippets of information from a multitude of connections feel lost when disconnected from their smartphones and laptops. One of her key findings is that "these days, insecure in our relationships and anxious about intimacy, we look to technology for ways to be in relationships and protect ourselves from them at the same time".

In light of all this, the digital natives in our research group started debating about the right to disconnect. They proposed that there is so much expectation and focus on being connected, that it seems like they don't have a choice. This was a new way of looking at the relationships that digital natives have with technology.

Paola, one of our 20-something discussants from Latin America, told the story of the tyranny of BlackBerries. One of her friends recently applied for an internship as a part of her graduation programme. He cleared the interviews and got a six-month internship position with a large media house in Brazil. On the first day of work, as a part of his orientation, he was offered a BlackBerry. He wasn't particularly fond of the device and preferred to use his own smartphone. His reasoning was, "The BlackBerry never allows you to disconnect. When I am not at work, I want to be not at work."

It came as a rude shock to him when the company said that he had to use the BlackBerry because they wanted him be connected 24X7 to the media flows online. When he insisted, he was told that he would lose his internship if he did not accept the BlackBerry.

It is a story that found resonance with many other digital natives. They agreed that the internet is an incredible space for information consumption, and that they were very keen on the digital tools of communication and mobilisation. However, there seems to be an increased pressure on them to be wired all the time -no unplugging the cable, no downtime on the computer, no turning off of the cellphone. "If I have to go offline, I actually have to put it on Facebook and Twitter so that my friends don't get anxious," said another one.

"I get messages from followers asking me if I am alright, if I don't tweet for more than a few hours", agreed another. These pressures come from peers as well as the external world. And maybe, it is time to start talk ing about, along with the right to access, the right to disconnect.

The world might be shrinking and time might be ac celerating, but there is a value in being all alone and not necessarily together. As Paola says, "The next time you don't get a reply to your message from me in five minutes, it doesn't mean I am dead. It means that I choose not to. That I am digitally disconnected."

Email:

digitalnative@expressindia.com

Read the original in the Indian Express here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/pull-plug

Copy, Left And Right

praskrishna — 2012-05-23T06:37:53Z

Copyright laws are becoming more rigid and anti-sharing. But copyleft has a solution.

The article by Shruti Yadav was published in Outlook Business on February 19, 2011. Pranesh Prakash was quoted in this article.

Underlying some of the most ancient Indian literature is a unique concept—sruti, or divine revelation. Much of this Vedic literature is supposed to have been revealed by the Gods to sages, who then passed it on orally from generation to generation till the formation of the written word, when it was codified. By claiming this divine connection, the authors didn’t just immortalise themselves and their works, they also renounced ownership of it. They presented themselves as humble storytellers, who needed the audience to tell the story again and again to keep it alive, just like the Gods needed them to tell it for the first time.

The transfer of knowledge freely wasn’t limited to India. In the ancient systems of medicine, schools of art, mythology and folklore, there is striking and frequent cross-referentiality across civilisations. Of course, knowledge was at a premium even in these societies, but no one claimed ownership of it.

Then, as increasing democratisation of knowledge threatened established political, religious and commercial interests, the western world awoke to the necessity of copyright, which evolved as a protection for monopolies over technology, research and works of art, and now is strangling even those who produce the work in the first place. So, after transferring the copyrights to their work, people often find that their lives are dictated to by studios, publishers and software companies, through complex and rigorous laws that concentrate on profiteering to the exclusion of everything else, including the freedoms of the author and the user.

It is in the assertion of the freedom, of both the source of the work, and its users, that copyleft is becoming the voice of a growing number of people. The copyleft movement can be said to have been started by Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), who developed the GNU operating system that, with the incorporation of the Linux kernel made free by its proprietor Linus Torvalds, became Gnu/Linux. His General Public Licence (GPL) is the byword in protecting user freedom.

So, what is copyleft? It is a form of copyright, but unlike copyright that reserves all rights related to a work, copyleft allows users to copy, modify and distribute the work, with the rider that the resulting copies come with the same freedom. Creative Commons, the non-profit global organisation that helps people copyleft their work, calls this ShareAlike.

Sharing is a contentious issue today. Because of digital technology, which allows us to copy and share virtually free of cost, knowledge and art are easily and cheaply accessible. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a stricter regime that routinely criminalises schoolchildren for downloading the latest songs from the Internet. If you buy a car, and lend it your friend, can the car company claim you are a criminal? But it is the technicality of making a copy for the purpose of sharing that makes a vice out of a natural human impulse. As Karsten Gerloff, President, FSF Europe, puts it, “When laws clash with common sense, on such an enormous, global scale, we don’t need to change common sense. We need to change the laws.” A purist when it comes to freedom, Stallman echoes this sentiment in stronger words, “Laws against sharing are attacks on society. "Anyone who tries to stop people from sharing has declared himself the enemy of us all.”

Richard Stallman, Founder and President, Free Software Foundation

Copyright Protects Work... Or Does It?

Two arguments often misused to justify the strict, all-rights-reserved policy of copyright are that it prevents plagiarism and incentivises innovation and creativity. The argument of plagiarism can easily be dismissed. As Pranesh Prakash, Programme Manager, Centre For Internet And Society points out, “No licence can take away the right of a person to be identified with his or her work. The moral rights of a person are non-transferable.” The second argument is more insidious.

When Nina Paley released her critically acclaimed animation film, Sita Sings The Blues, she chose a Creative Commons By-SA licence. This means anybody could copy, modify and distribute the work under the same licence. Paley says, “I wanted my film to reach the widest audience...ShareAlike would prevent the work from being ever locked up. It’s better than Public Domain; works are routinely removed from the Public Domain via privatised derivatives.” So copyright doesn’t really protect the work; often people who decide its destiny have not even made it in the first place. In fact, Gerloff points out, “Copyright makes it possible for individuals to appropriate traditional stories and mythical characters as Disney has done with the folk tales collected by the Brothers Grimm and others. Anyone who tries to return those characters to the popular imagination is immediately torn apart by a screaming horde of Disney lawyers.” So, is it an incentive for the artist, the software-maker, or the scientist?

Of course, there is a financial aspect of the question. Most people who use copyleft licences do not become millionaires overnight. But they do make money. Within a year of her film’s release, Paley made $132,000, recovering about half the cost of production. The money came from donations, awards, screenings, merchandising and sharing of revenue by people who made derivative works. Best of all, Paley could choose her revenue models, without restricting her audience. Compare this with lyricist Javed Akhtar being banned by the Film Federation of India for lobbying in Parliament for better royalty for lyricists and composers—the new law proposes to improve their lot by giving them 12.5% each, while 75% still goes to the producers.

How Copyleft Helps

On the economic side of the argument for copyleft is also the fact that making a work available for others to modify leads to improved quality and saves costs of duplication of work. Android is an example of sharing driving innovation, though, according to Stallman, it compromises the spirit of free software, as many phones with Android systems don’t let users install modified versions of the software but let software companies do so. Finally, free market logic should make absolute copyright redundant. As Paley points out, “Copyright is an artificial monopoly. Monopolies are inherently at odds with competition and free trade."

While knowledge-based economies are still reluctant to give up their old habits, legislators in countries like India have to make a choice. Shishir K Jha, Project Leader, Creative Commons India, says, “We need to take a view: do we want to make information scarce or easily available? Because this has implications in many areas—education, health, R&D."

Artists who copyleft their work do make money; they distribute their work without restricting its audience.

In the Mahabharata, the tribal boy Eklavya wants to learn archery from Dronacharya—the teacher of the Pandavas and Kauravas—who has vowed to teach only the royal princes. Determined, Eklavya makes a clay statue of his revered teacher and learns on his own, soon becoming the best archer in the kingdom, even better than Arjun, Dronacharya’s favourite student. So what does the teacher do when he finds out? As guru-dakshina, (the obligatory payment for teaching), he asks for Eklavya’s right thumb, thus cutting him off (literally) from his self-taught skill.

Those seeking to establish a knowledge monopoly often operate through a set of cruel and unfair laws. Should we stop sharing?

Licences for Freedom

Bridging the gap between Copyright and Public Domain.

Art Libre: Allows users to copy, modify and incorporate a creative work, including for commercial use, as long as subsequent versions are licenced under the same or a compatible licence. The user must specify if the original is modified and credit the original artist. A creative work may be physical or digital—text, sound, video—anything over which the maker has a copyright.

GNU/ GPL: Allows users to copy, modify and incorporate the work, including for commercial purposes. The licence is passed on automatically with subsequent versions. A person can’t compromise user freedom by using a GPL software as part of a version that is licenced under conditions (or is subject to legislations) that infringe on the rights granted by the GPL licence. In case of a clash, the use of the GPL software is simply invalid.

Creative Commons (CC) has several licences, which are essentially combinations of a few standard criteria:

Attribution: Maker’s name.
Share-alike: The stipulation that copies, modifications or derivatives be passed on under the same conditions.
Derivatives: The licencee can chose whether or not to allow derivatives of his work.
Comercial use: The licencee can choose whether or not to allow copies, derivatives and subsequent versions to be used for commercial use.

As a result, we have six types of licences:

CC BY or Attribution
CC BY-SA or Attribution-ShareAlike
CC BY-ND or Attribution-NoDerivatives
CC BY-NC or Attribution-NonCommercial
CC BY-NC-SA or Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
CC BY-NC-ND or Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives

Paley warns: Use a truly Free licence, such as ShareAlike or ArtLibre. NEVER use a “non-commercial” or “no-derivatives” licence. Those are not copyleft and are incompatible with Free Culture.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/copy-left-and-right

Open Letter to the Finance Committee: UID and Transactions

praskrishna — 2011-02-24T13:35:11Z

Since official documentation from the UIDAI is very limited, we assume that data pertaining to transactions would comprise of the Aadhaar number, identifier of the authenticating device, date-time stamp, and approval/rejection/error code. Recording and maintaining of data pertaining to transactions is very important because it increases transparency and accountability through an audit trail. However, storage of such sensitive data creates many privacy risks, because more often than not metadata gives you as much intelligence as raw data.

For example – even if you didn’t have access to the Radia recordings – just knowing who she called, when, how frequently, in what order, and for how long, will give quite a comprehensive picture. Thus, we believe that such data should not be fully stored in a central database. By way of an open letter, we suggest three alternative ways of storing and securing data relating to transactions, so that transparency and accountability is preserved without enabling surveillance or profiling of individuals.

Partial storage of data relating to transactions

Once a transaction is processed, half of the UID number is stored in the central database, while the other half of the number is stored with the service provider. Thus, for an agency to reconstruct the audit trail they must seek consent from the service provider and the UIDAI for information regarding a specific transaction. The process would follow steps like these:

Send part of the Aadhaar number to the CIDR
Service provider stores part of the Aadhaar number locally.
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies seeking transaction data securing required approvals from the Home Ministry and then request data from the UIDAI and service provider
Data is provided by UIDAI and the service provider and combined to reconstruct the audit trail.

Storage of the public keys with a custodian

Similar to the model followed in the new wiretapping regulations1, the transaction details in the central database is secured using several custodians. Thus, no single entity has complete knowledge of access to the database. And if the transaction details are leaked to the public, the custodian can be held responsible for negligence. Thus, for an agency to reconstruct the audit trail they must seek approvals and request encrypted data. The process would follow steps like these:

Encrypt transaction data with the public key of the ‘custodian’
Store encrypted data in CIDR
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies seeking transaction details require approvals from the Home Ministry, and then request encrypted data from the UIDAI.
The custodian on receipt of the necessary approvals decrypts the data using his/her private key, and then the audit trail becomes available.

Complete storage of transaction details at the service provider level

After a transaction is processed, the information is encrypted and stored in a de-centralized manner with the service provider, thus agencies or individuals can only access information regarding a specific transaction at a specific organization. The process would follow steps like these:

Encrypt transaction data
Store encrypted data at service provider level
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies seeking transaction details require approvals from the Home Ministry, and then request encrypted data from each service provider. Audit trail is reconstructed by merging data sets from different service providers.
The CIDR will only hold Aadhaar number, date-time stamp, and approval/rejection/error code.

Note

1 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Tapping-norms-Govt-will-erase-private-talk/articleshow/7407633.cms

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/uid-and-transactions

New Kids on the Blog

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T16:10:34Z

Across the world, the blogosphere is shrinking. But that might not be a bad thing. Look closer, self-indulgence has found newer platforms, and only the fittest and the smartest blogs have survived. This article was published by the Indian Express on February 6, 2011. Indian Express reporter spoke with Nishant Shah.

Meet aneesha, a personable 20-something in a red jacket, with a coffee “without cream” cupped in her hands. Seven years ago, this Delhi-based professional was an avid user of LiveJournal. Most of her friends are from the online world; she met their blogs before she knew them personally. “My family’s perception of me and what I am are very different,” she says, “I hide myself in the layers of the internet.” Aneesha found herself and her friends through blogs; today, however, she has no time or inclination for the blogging world. “We used to write about the sunshine, a cute dog, a nice day. Who has the time for that any more?”

“I quit”. “We are moving out”. “This blog is Dead”.

An aerial view of the blogosphere resembles an abandoned city, with silence blowing through boarded-up windows. Recent Pew Internet Project surveys of teens and adults in the US reveal a decline in blogging among teens and young adults and a modest rise among adults 30 and older. According to the 2010 report, “In 2006, 28 per cent of teens in the 12-17 age group, and adults between 18 and 29 were bloggers, but by 2009, the numbers had dropped to 14 per cent of teens and 15 per cent of adults. During the same period, the percentage of online adults over 30 who were bloggers rose from 7 per cent to 11 per cent.” These numbers reflect American reality, but the blogosphere has not been similarly mapped and analysed in India, says Nishant Shah, director, research, Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore. When contacted, WordPress, a blog tool and publishing platform, said that they don’t publish country-specific statistics either.

While blogging in itself seems to have peaked and plateaued, blog-like activities have moved to other online spaces. Blogs were at the social media forefront around five years ago. According to Technorati, an internet search engine for blogs, the blogosphere in 2004 was eight times as large as it was in June 2003. Since then, Blogger and WordPress have been stagnating, says Nielsen, a media-research firm. A 2010 article in The Economist pointed out, that according to Blogads, which sells ads, “media buyers’ inquiries increased tenfold between 2004 and 2008, but have grown by only 17 per cent since then.”

But the numbers only tell a part of the story. The immensity of the blogging world means that it will always remain terra incognita. Its vastness allows poorly-written, lazily-reasoned dribbles to exist, but it also provides an unparalleled democratic platform (if you have access to the internet). The blogosphere, which had become an endless echo chamber, has evolved into a more interesting space, with startling diversity. Teenagers have found new fads, and moved out; instead, adults are setting up their couches here. Over the last four-five years, the fittest and smartest blogs have survived, whereas those with a readership of one have sunk to Google’s ocean floor. Few bloggers actually bother to delete their accounts, most starve away because of the author’s neglect and the audiences’ disinterest. The ones that have thrived have created communities of kindred souls, with an eye for beauty or a knack for the kooky. The Indian blogosphere is rich ground for posts on cinema, economics, sports, design and politics. Blogs can be conclaves of critics against the mainstream, they can be crucial support systems for the grieving. But how did we get here?

Peter Merholz, a lover of words and etymologies, and founding partner of consultancy Adaptive Path, created the word “blog” in 1999.

Playing with syllables, he decided to change “weblog” into “blog” for short. This San Francisco-based designer writes in his blog, “I like that it’s roughly onomatopoeic of vomiting. These sites (mine included!) tend to be a kind of information upchucking.”

For something that started as verbal upchucking, blogging has evolved over the decade. Anupam Mukerji, aka the Fake IPL Player, whose blog was the sensational sideshow that overshadowed the second edition of the Indian Premier League in 2009, says, “Self-indulgence is out. People want to be entertained and nobody really cares what you had for breakfast.”

In the early part of this decade, blogging was about self-expression, within a small community (like LiveJournal), says Aneesha. Kiran Jonnalagadda, a Bangalore-based social technologist, and founder of HasGeek, which organises technical discussions, recalls, “Your blog was not secret, but was private by virtue of not many people being online. It was a safe assumption for young people that their parents and siblings would never read their blog. The medium of the blog was the most advanced technology of the day. It was crude by modern standards, but fantastic compared to anything earlier.” Aneesha and Jonnalagadda abandoned LiveJournal after their initial euphoria. Today, it is said, only the Russians use it, since it was bought over by a Russian company in 2007.

Blogging has come of age in India where we now see the growth of the “modern blogger”, says Jonnalagadda, one of the early Indian bloggers. “It’s important to distinguish between these two — the blogger as someone who indulged in self-expression in the early 2000s, who’s now moved to Facebook and other tools, versus the modern blogger who uses the same technology but is actually a small media publisher serving a niche segment.”

Facebook and Twitter are dummy-friendly and easily satisfy the exhibitionist, the voyeur, the curious or the intellectual. In 2010, there were 152 million blogs on the internet; it doesn’t seem much in comparison to 600 million Facebook users. On Facebook, it takes just a few seconds to upload a picture. A “thumbs up” is all it takes to “like” a photo or a comment. A personal update becomes part of the newsflash on friends’ homepages. Facebook’s “Notes” can satisfy the desire to write long, random and personal outpourings. “Tagging” friends in these notes assures one of a readership. Sharing so little with so many has never been this effortless. Blogs, defined as a format of writing, where pieces are arranged in a reverse chronological order, are no longer the preferred tool for the personal.

Technorati reports that the significant growth of mobile blogging is a key trend in 2010. Though the smartphone may still be relatively new in India, bloggers have reported that mobile blogging has lead to shorter posts and to a growing preference for Facebook and Twitter. Kiruba Shankar, CEO of Business Blogging Pvt Ltd, a social media consultancy in Chennai, and a once-prolific blogger, says, “Five years back, I was averaging two posts a day. In 2010, which was my worst year in blogging, I did one post every two months! It’s not that I stopped writing. I just moved my updates to Twitter and Facebook.” Shankar has even written an entire book in 140-character capsules on the merits of collaborative work: Crowdsourcing Tweet. He explains, “I love reading smaller books. I love tweeting my thoughts. I wanted to eat the elephant in smaller bites and so I jotted down points in tweets.”

On the Web, none of these social mediums work in isolation, each is connected with the other. Facebook and Twitter have also become ways to promote blogs, with people often posting their links and thereby increasing their readership and the scope of the conversation.

With blogs moving beyond the personal, the rise of the modern blogger writing for a niche audience is of particular interest. Mumbai-based Chandrahas Choudhury, author of The Middle Stage, a blog of essays on Indian and world literature, says, “Blogs have matured over the years in India. People who are serious have kept it. Lots of the press indulge in the criticism that blogs are not edited. But I’ve seen many great blogs. It’s a very good way of learning how to write good prose.” The Middle Stage provides an important space for literary criticism at a time when newspapers are squeezing out literary columns. Blogs give “maximum freedom”, says Choudhury, as one can increase the content through links; they also allow one to quote freely from other texts, which newspapers do not allow.

Shankar emphasises that search engines give more importance to any site with fresh content, and that blogs have high “archival value”, compared with “Facebook or Twitter where old updates seem to fall off the face of the earth”. The Google requisite for new content has made the group blog a better option than the personal as it makes it easier to generate content regularly. Successful group blogs are making an impact.

Little Design Book, “an online journal of design, visual culture and material culture”, is run by Ruchita Madhok, Aditya Palsule, Avinash Rajagopal and Shreyas Krishnan. The editors, who are based in London, New York, and Bangalore respectively, work collaboratively and communicate through Skype. Through smart and pithy posts, they describe designs that are too good to be true and those which are too awful to seem probable. On this team blog, art and design interact in meaningful ways, producing discussions and insights. Speaking from New York on the behalf of his team, Rajagopal feels that design blogs have taken off recently in India. “The Web is a great place to discuss design because it is an inherently democratic medium. Anyone can have their say.”

Others, who have made use of the democratic and immediate nature of the internet, include Pavitra Mohan, who runs the successful blog Masala Chai, a “creative collective that features south Asian art and design”. These blogs about Indian art and design are few but they are playing an important role in the promotion and criticism of the arts. Mohan says, “There’s high art and low art. They are both provided a uniform platform on the Web.” Started three years ago, the blog recently became a physical reality, with Masala Chai opening its first outlet in Chennai.

Rajagopal feels, however, that there’s still scope for editorialising content. “Many blogs post images of design objects, and say a few obligatory words. This has its necessary place in the blogging world. But we also need many strident, opinionated voices.”

Strident voices with trenchant opinions ring in collective blogs like Kafila, run by no single CEO but by 22 members. Speaking only for himself and not on behalf of Kafila, Shivam Vij, writer and member, says, “Blogging is ‘self-publishing’. To read blogs (and today, together with social media) is to get an uncut view of what a society thinks, without the frame of the organised media. This allows people to use blogging and social media to influence opinion, and thus cause change, good or bad.”

While blogs can be viewed as enjoyable entertainment or a platform for serious discussion and debate, blogs can also change lives. It can make famous the anonymous man stooped over a keyboard, with a prank in his head and spunk in his prose. Anupam Mukerji, the Fake IPL Player whose anonymous blog fooled thousands of cricket fans and administrators, and who revealed his identity in August last year, says, “I am still the same guy, but people respond to me differently. The blog changed my life.”

Blogging was also the “perfect tonic” for actor Lisa Ray, who started writing The Yellow Diaries once she’d been diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a cancer of the white blood cells, in June 2009. Her blog posts, written with heart and without fuss, chronicled her battle with the disease, from being a “cancer intern” to a “cancer survivor”. In what ways did the blog help her? “In every way,” she says. “It helped me process what I was going through. It helped me be honest with myself and face my fears head on. It also helped me connect with others by sharing a very human experience. It helped dilute my fear.” Her blog also helped others, obvious in the hundreds of comments left by readers. Talking about readers’ responses, she says, “I do remember thinking that we suffer from the ‘pathology of perfection’ in contemporary society and the only antidote is to celebrate our ‘humanness’ in all forms. To embrace the hurt and pain as much as the joys and success.”

Blogging was also a tonic for Indian Homemaker or Seema Rao, blogger and mother of Tejaswee Rao, a 19-year-old journalism student who passed away last year. Seema has been a frequent blogger for the last three years and now maintains her daughter’s blog In My Arrogant Opinion. She feels her daughter lives on through her presence on the Web. Sitting in a Gurgaon living room, surrounded by photos of her daughter, Rao says, “The family wanted a memorial gathering. But I know people will talk about her illness, they’ll say you should have gone to another hospital. I feel the blogosphere is more mature. A memorial would have been traumatic. I get support from bloggers, from people who don’t even know my name. On Tejaswee’s birthday, a mother in Hyderabad sent me a cake, with TJ written on it. I don’t know how I would have coped without the blogs.”

The original article was published in the Indian Express

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/new-kids

Open Letter to the Finance Committee: Operational Design

praskrishna — 2011-02-17T10:02:46Z

The objective of the UID project is to provide identity infrastructure that is not susceptible to fraud or error. This note highlights parts of the operational design of the project, which are flawed. We plead that each point be taken into consideration and that the design be suitably revised.

Flawed aspects of the operational design

During enrolment: false identities

Initial proof of one’s identity is best proved through multiple, standardized documents. The UID lists seventeen acceptable documents.1 Acceptance and verification of only one of these identities is necessary for enrolment. This is a lower standard than existing forms of identity such as the Passport or the PAN card.2

During transactions: technology will not solve corruption

In every transaction that requires the use of the Aadhaar number, there are four points where corruption is possible and delivery of services will not take place:

The technology fails, and does not perform authentication;
The authority fails and delivers a false positive or false negative;
The local administrator fails to deliver the service after authentication;
The biometric fails due to biological changes, and thus the individual is denied benefits; and
Fraudulent use of face biometrics at the transaction level.

During transactions: high cost of centralization with limited benefits

Verifying unique identity for every transaction will introduce an unnecessary authentication overhead. In the UID Bill, there is provision for standardized authentication fees.3

At some point service providers will pass on the authentication cost through a required authentication fee to the residents. This will take place with no entitlement of any service or guarantee against fraud.

During redressal: no guarantee of quick and adequate remedies

The delivery of services is guaranteed only when there is an optional way for transactions to be completed. If an Aadhaar number holder attempts to complete a transaction, and the UIDAI rejects it, the individual can make a request for re-verification with the registrar.4

If the UIDAI still rejects the request, the individual must file a complaint to the UIDAI contact centre and wait for appropriate remedial action,5 yet the UIDAI is not liable for the loss of service.

During upgrades of the system: patchwork approach to data protection

It is more secure to have pro-active data protection than re-active data protection. The data protection legislation that is meant to secure data processed in the UID project will be established only after the UID bill becomes law. One can only assume that the UID will respond to every new policy development in a patchwork fashion.

1http://uidai.gov.in/index.php?option=com_fsf&view=faq&Itemid=206&catid=24

2 http://passport.nic.in/, http://nrisharejunction.com/pan.aspx

3 Chapter 3, Section 23 (2) (o): The National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010

4 http://uidai.gov.in/UID_PDF/Front_Page_Articles/Documents/Strategy_Overveiw-001.pdf

5 http://uidai.gov.in/images/FrontPageUpdates/aadhaarhandbookver1.2.pdf pg.18

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/operational-design

Open Letter to the Finance Committee: UID Budget

praskrishna — 2011-02-17T11:18:16Z

This note presents the aspects of the UID project, which have not been considered or incorporated into the UID’s budget. The costs include re-enrollment, loss in human time, and the cost of the audit function.

Cost of re-enrollment
In the report 'Biometrics Design Standards for UID Applications' 1 a pilot study in India concluded that about two to five per cent of the people did not have viable biometric data. These data have not been taken into account when setting the program budget. Over time biometrics modify, thus re-enrollment will be required. The UIDAI states that given the changing nature of biometric data – biometrics would be collected every five years for children and every ten years for adults. The current project does not give us a clear picture as to what extent the re-enrollment will be required, and how the additional costs will be accounted for.
Cost of loss in human time
A time motion study is a tool used to enhance business efficiency and ensure cost effectiveness by reducing the number of motions in performing a task. In their budget, the UIDAI has accounted for the salaries of individuals associated directly with the UIDAI. The UIDAI has not accounted for the loss in human time that will take place by individuals whose daily routine will be impacted by the UID. If a time motion study were to be done only on the UID project, one would find that individuals not paid by the UIDAI, lose potential wages due to the unpaid time they must dedicate towards the scheme – or that businesses will be forced to compensate for the extra time required for each transaction by providing additional personnel. For example: On a train the number of train masters present is calculated according to how many individuals each ticket master can check and process. With the UID, in order to prevent fraud around subsidized train tickets , individuals on the train will have their biometrics checked and authenticated. The below diagram demonstrates how authenticating an individual by their UID and biometric incurs a loss in human time, and thus, the process of collecting train tickets will require more train masters to complete.
Current Process:
- Present ticket to train master
- Train master checks identity card and identity on ticket
- Train master ticks ticket, and ticks his list to indicate verification
Process with biometrics:
- Present Aadhaar number, fingerprint , and ticket to train master
- Train master takes a reading of your fingerprint and sends it to the central database
- Train master waits for approval from the CIDR
- The CIDR gives a yes or no response
- If the answer is no – the train master swipes your finger five times, and then finds alternate forms of identification
- Train master provides proof of verification
Cost of audit function
The bulk of the UID enabled transactions will have financial implications. Every financial transaction involves three or four parties: the person who collects the payment, the person who prepares the documentation, the person who approves the documentation, and finally the person who audits the documentation. In such a context the technology can play the role of the person who: collects, prepares, and approves each transaction. The role of auditing the transaction cannot be played by technology. The audit function is human, and the audit function needs to be worked into the project budget.

1 “Biometrics Design Standards for UID Applications" pg.22

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/uid-budget

Open Letter to the Finance Committe: Biometrics

praskrishna — 2011-02-17T13:12:22Z

This note points out the weaknesses inherent in biometrics and the pitfalls in using them. It recommends procedural safeguards that should be adopted by the UID in order to make the use of biometrics more secure and inclusive.

Biometrics are not centrally stored and are used only for identification

Biometrics, as our first letter notes 1 are better suited for identification, and are inappropriate for authentication. Therefore, the central server need not store biometric information, and need only store the public key of each citizen's digital signature.2 Biometrics on a smart card for authentication will allow service providers to determine if the card is being carried by the right person. This configuration of biometrics has many positives. It is :
- Cost effective
- More secure
- Places the control of biometric information in the hands of the data subject
Use encrypted data, rather than live data

The UID scheme has stated that biometrics will be encrypted, but has not provided further details. 3
It is recommended that biometrics are:
- Encrypted whenever it is used, stored and transferred;
- A biometric should be encrypted to such a degree that it is not possible to reconstruct the biometric data; and
- After an encrypted version of the biometric is made, the original biometric should be deleted.
In order to perform an identification check – the biometrics presented should be encrypted and then compared to the encrypted version stored on the card. If the card is stolen – the thief would not be able to harvest biometrics.
Security clearance for all associated entities and personnel

UID registrations and transactions will be handled by 'registrars' or in other words personnel who work at organizations not directly under the control of the UIDAI. A clear process associated with who can perform transactions and a proper audit system is needed to prevent 'insider' attacks.
Clearly defined alternate identification factors

There are many situations in which a biometric cannot be accepted in a transaction. For example, when the biometric changes, is misread, or is unreadable. The UID has recognized this possibility and has stated: “In case of authentication, the operator needs to find an alternate method of authentication if fingerprint verification fails. The operator/application would not know the cause of verification failure. A timeout will be implemented in service after five attempts.”4
The alternative identity factors that will be accepted need to be clearly defined and articulate.
Standards for acceptance of biometric as authentication factor

The UIDAI has proposed a whole range of authentication factors – pin, password, partial biometrics, full biometrics, mobile phone and combination's thereof. 5 Some of these authentication factors may also be presented by the data subject over the Internet. As our previous letters have stated – some authentication factors are more secure than others. Therefore, the UIDAI should publish standards for acceptance of different authentication factors based on the security requirements of different types of transactions. Even if biometrics are used as an authentication standard – in our opinion it should only be used for trivial transactions without major financial or citizenship implications.

Footnotes:

1http://www.cis-india.org/advocacy/igov/privacy-india/letter-to-finance-committee

2 Distinguish and separate the authentication process from the identification process: Identification is a comparison of one set of biometric data against all sets of collected biometrics in one central database to verify the identity of the owner of the biometric data. Authentication is a comparison of a biometric against a stored template to validate the existence of that specific biometric

3 http://uidai.gov.in/index.php?option=com_fsf&view=faq&Itemid=206&catid=7

4 Biometric Design Standards for UID Applications: pg 37

5 UIDAI Strategy Overview. Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in India. Pg. 28

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/biometrics

Can the twitterati change the world?

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T16:30:10Z

Whether it is the Ganapati immersion in Mumbai or a labour union dharna at Jantar Mantar or a hunger strike in Kolkata, India has had a rich history of people coming out on the streets. However, as cities are reshaped in the image of a 'world-class city', public spaces are being steadily appropriated into gated communities which cater to an elite section of the population.

Although the shrinking of public spaces is not the only reason the younger urban population is engaging with cyber space, it has certainly contributed to the shift. The recent historic transformations that have taken place in Egypt and Tunisia show that the digital sphere, which cannot be wholly regulated or shut down, has become the platform for protest.

When a 26-year old university graduate in Tunisia lost his only source of income after the police had confiscated his fruit and vegetable cart, he set himself on fire, setting into motion a nationwide protest which resonated through the internet. People poured into the streets and stood fast until the authoritarian president, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, left the country. "Without the internet, it would be possible for the massacre to happen in silence for us and for the outside world. Five years ago, without Facebook and Twitter, the same uprising would have been smothered, " says an anonymous Tunisian interviewed by @kyrah (Twitter).

In Egypt, as well, technology was harnessed to spread the word across a huge and unprecedented section of the population within a short span of time, engineering the mob gathering we saw in Tahrir Square.

In the vastly different political context of India, digital activism serves the purpose of increasing openness, access and transparency.

Nishant Shah, the Research Director for the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore argues that the evolution of digital activism in India in the first decade of the 21st century can be seen through the emphasis on creating open structures of arbitration, justice, policy and jurisdiction. "The effort has been to grant access to the state, its governance and resources to the citizens, " he says.

Initially, digital natives in India were considered programmers or techies who were not just web savvy but technologically aware. For example, Vote Report India, a citizen-driven electionmonitoring platform, was the brainchild of software developers, designers and other professionals. Maesy Angelina, whose research for her MA looked into understanding the involvement of youth in online campaigns in India, argues that the way in which digital natives are perceived has been changed, "Since the Pink Chaddi campaign, a new angle becomes more prominent: one that views digital natives as regular people who have grown up with the internet and are web savvy, but not necessarily techies. "

Campaigns such as Batti Bandh, Justice for Jessica, the 2008 Gateway of India rally after the Mumbai attacks, and most recently the group called "It's my Arunachal, Dream on China, " have leveraged the existing networks on social media websites.

However, digital activism when transplanted into a developing country such as India leverages its own forms of discrimination, excluding sections of the population without the cultural, economic and educational capital to gain access to these spaces. While the medium can be useful in generating public dialogue, it is not enough to sustain a movement if it cannot reach non-internet users. Though technology can be used to organise, these protests must then manifest into public gatherings.

"The digital can help us in re-appropriating and reclaiming the fast disappearing physical spaces of public engagement, gathering and participation in our cities, " says Shah. "The technology is not an alternative, but is embedded in the physical worlds we inhabit and it becomes a powerful tool to fight back and demand the spaces that are central to the imagination of a coherent, responsible and sapient public. "

Fight-Back, an online gender equality campaign launched in 2008, now has about 4, 000 members on its Facebook group, who act as a volunteer database nationally. The group uses its website and social media to create awareness and start a conversation which then translates into events such as their Music for Equality concerts and Women's Day marches. The group's founder, Zubin Driver, 41, argues that digital activism is on the rise in India, "Mobile phone penetration in India is already 700 million. Once internet via mobile phones becomes more common, digital activism will cut across class, caste and geographical boundaries. "

Parmesh Sahani, the founder of the Godrej Culture Lab and the author of Gay Bombay, says that even though the audience for digital activism is restricted to English-speaking, twittering, Facebooking people, congregating online often leads to people coming out on the streets. "There are great opportunities in the intersections between the digital medium and actual physical spaces. The overspill of the Mumbai Gay Pride parade into cafês near the official route goes to show that activism still persists in the peripheries of regulated spaces. "

Though often vilified as armchair activism or slacktivism, digital activism has a role to play in facilitating community building in a changing urban landscape. The new forms of organisation and intervention have the potential to be more inclusive than older modes of social transformation, crossing geographies and communities. "Every medium comes with a promise and possibility of change when it's introduced - television, print, radio, loud speaker, " says Patheja. "The conversations on the internet don't usually end there;the participants of the movement hopefully carry these ideas and beliefs to their other linked communities or spaces. "

However, all new platforms come with pitfalls. "The power of the internet and wireless social networks as tools of dissent is now well established, " says Rajni Bakshi, author of Bazaars, Conversations and Freedom. "What is not so well known is that the future of the internet itself is under threat - not just from dictatorships and repressive regimes, but from an assortment of private, profit-motivated entities. "

Read the original in the Times of India here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/twitterati-change-world

Procuring books in Indian libraries

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T16:27:28Z

Campaign to legalise parallel imports gathers steam.

In a move to advocate the cause of libraries and book readers throughout India, campaigners are telling Kapil Sibal, the Minister of Human Resources Development (HRD), why it is important to legalise parallel imports in India. This move is supported by the International Federation of Library Associations in developing countries.

Among the proposed amendments to the Copyright Act is a proposal to legalise parallel importation of books into India. This provision is now under threat because a publishers’ association convinced the HRD Minister (who is in charge of copyright law) that no one is calling for parallel importation. If parallel importing is not legalised in developing countries, it becomes impossible for libraries in India to even procure books from Amazon (for instance), especially the ones which have not yet released in India.

Parallel importation allows books that are (legally) bought overseas to be imported into India without asking the copyright owners permission. Without parallel importation being allowed, purchases made by libraries from foreign sellers (for instance on the Internet) are rendered illegal. International organisations like the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA), Electronic Information for Libraries (eIFL), and Consumers International all support parallel importation, especially in developing countries.

For more on the need for parallel importation, see this write up by Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore.

For the campaign letter sent to Kapil Sibal by February 1st 2011, see below:

To
Minister for Human Resource Development
Room No 301
Shastri Bhawan
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road
New Delhi – 110 001

Date: Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Dear Shri Sibal,

Subject: Parallel Importation of Books

We write to you as an organisation interested in the availability of books for libraries. Recently, a publishers’ association has made public statements that there are no groups that are demanding parallel importation, and that they themselves will be harmed by allowing for parallel importation.

We wish to inform you that this is not true. We believe that being able to legally purchase a book outside of India and import in into India is crucial for libraries. Many books that we wish to provide for our users—faculties, students, and others—are not available in India and have to be imported from abroad.

Currently the exception contained in s.51(b) proviso is applicable only to individuals for “private and domestic use” and does not cover libraries. Thus, if parallel importation is prohibited, then we will be unable to buy foreign books directly from foreign sellers. We often have to make purchases on online bookstores such as Amazon and Alibris, and these will be construed to be illegal without parallel importation being legal. We will be left at the mercy of what books are offered by sellers in India, instead of being able to buy what is required by our readers.

Parallel importation is allowed by the TRIPS agreement (Article 6, “Exhaustion”) as well as by the WIPO Copyright treaty (Article 6, “Right of Distribution”). We hope you will keep our concerns in mind.

Yours sincerely,
Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore

Read the original here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/procuring-books

Can the mouse be a tool of revolution in India?

praskrishna — 2011-04-01T16:26:49Z

Do you consider yourself a ‘slacktivist’?” Vikram Sengupta considers the question for a couple of seconds, and then excuses himself. “I’ll call you back. I’m in the middle of something right now,” he says, and hangs up. Being called a ‘slacktivist’ is probably not very flattering, first thing in the morning or at any other time of the day. But this writer has been at the receiving end of endless mails from him, mails which sought to impose a burning moral imperative to sign up instantly and save the grand Canadian Musk Ox or the Mexican Dumpy Frog. The question, therefore, is not unjustified.

Activists vs slacktivists

The slick application of the word ‘slacktivist’ is the work of eminent scholar and author of The Net Delusion, Evgeny Morozov. Rather stinging in its import, it refers to people who, while campaigning for social causes, limit their action to the click of a mouse. In an earlier interview with DNA Sunday, Morozov was quick to clarify that he had nothing against online activism (activism through social-networking sites, websites, blogs and online petitions), “but I’d rather see the people signing (petitions) also join some offline political movements and campaign for change in the real world as much as they do in the virtual world,” he had said.

Sengupta does call back. And when the question is put to him again, he says, “People can call me a ‘slacktivist’ if they want. Look, I don’t have a lot of time to devote to activism and I don’t even know if signing petitions actually works. But when I see that a simple click of mine might possibly help save a rainforest or rid the world of its nuclear arsenal, I can’t just cynically turn away. I don’t know… I feel uncomfortable doing it.”

The phenomenon of ‘slacktivism’ elicits quite strong responses from the Indian activist community. People who grapple with the hard-knock realities of activism are not amused by the casual, momentary concern of the ‘slacktivist’.

Ashley Tellis is a freelance journalist, academic and gay rights activist. “The central limitation here is that one-click activism [slacktivism] becomes a substitute for sustained campaigns and engagement with persistent inequalities. The Indian middle-class, notorious for its apolitical and consumerist selfishness, can now feel smug and assuage its rotten conscience by thinking it has taken action on the net,” says Tellis, with some emotion.

While Tellis castigates, in no uncertain terms, the seeming apathy of the middle-class, he also acknowledges its prodigious influence on the Indian socio-political mind space. “The middle-class is an important segment. It has power, it has English, and it has the ability to be heard,” he admits.

Middle class audience

While this helps when it is mobilised for a good cause, many find it problematic that so much influence is concentrated in the hands of a single segment of society. In fact, if you take online activism, the number of people who can be reached through the internet is staggeringly low.

In a country of approximately 120 crore people, only about 5 crore [as per Indiastats.com] have access to the internet. Compare this to Tunisia, where the figure is an impressive 27%, or Egypt, where internet penetration is 16% [World Bank figures]. Given this lack of net access, more than 95% of Indians are taken out of consideration, in one fell swoop, when it comes to internet-specific activism strategies.

Anja Kovacs, a fellow at the Centre for Internet and Society says, “Most of these online campaigns are aligned to the profile of its audience.” She argues, in her essay ‘Inquilab 2.0?’ that if the audience is mostly urban and middle-class, it stands to reason that a majority of online campaigns would deal with issues that are relevant to this particular segment.

Kamayani Bali Mahabal, a lawyer and human rights activist, disagrees with this assessment. “Okay, the audience may be middle class, but the issues aren’t all middle class at all,” she counters indignantly. “Look at the ‘Say No to UID’ campaign — there is no debate or dialogue that has been initiated by Nandan Nilekani, the chairperson of UIDAI [Unique ID Authority of India], and this online campaign has created a platform where people’s issues and concerns can be clarified. Many believe that the UID will have a negative impact on the poor and the migrants; this campaign has gotten people to come together to discuss, debate and strategise as well,” she says.

But Kovacs insists, “The fact remains that it is people from the middle-class who represent the voices of a largely silent majority. I find this model of activism questionable.” The accuracy of how the voiceless are being represented is a cause of concern for her, as is the very idea of a platform that denies a large section of a vibrant social democracy the chance to express themselves directly.

The whole situation, Kovacs seems to indicate, is like Chinese whispers, where information might get altered in the retelling. “There are some innovative enterprises like CGNet Swara that tackle this problem. It’s a citizen journalism service, where ordinary citizens can both call in to record news as well as listen to the recorded messages. And they do put some selected messages online, but such enterprises are few and far between.” she says ruefully.

An aid to offline activism

So as things stand, the internet is an indispensable tool to reach out to the influential Indian middle-class. Yet, given India’s socio-economic reality, it’s also a problematic and, in some cases, ineffective medium. Bali Mahabal, when asked how she reconciles these contradictions, says, “I am an offline as well as an online activist. These are not mutually exclusive roles. I straddle both worlds and I can multi-task!”

In fact, this is a strategy that a lot of offline activists are warming up to now. In 2010, Himanshu Kumar put up a video in which he said,

“To the people in the cities, I want to say that… you write something on the internet, it doesn’t make any difference to the government. Neither do people read the internet, nor does the government.” Coming from one of the leading advocates of tribal rights in the Chhattisgarh area, this video was a scathing indictment of online activists.

Kumar, however, seems to have softened his stance on the issue since then. He still maintains that online activism by itself is not sufficient to bring about substantial change, but he speaks of how the internet helped him in his campaign in Dantewada.

“When we were in Dantewada, it was almost like a different planet. We had no connection to the outside world except through the internet. It annoyed the police quite a bit because they knew that if they tried anything untoward, we could get the word out. So the internet is definitely a value addition to on-the-ground activism, but by itself, it has its limitations.”

It is clear that the internet as a platform for social activism is here to stay. As access to the net increases among Indians, so will its effectiveness. Kovacs, in her essay writes of a person who says, rather movingly, “I believe that… ordinary people can use this medium [internet] to actually make a difference, you know…to change the world.”

But if activists want to live up to this unnamed person’s lofty expectations, they also need to be fully conscious of the limitations of the internet as a medium for social change.

Read the original in DNA here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/mouse-a-tool-of-revolution