Karnataka's proposed Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Bill, 2025, has stirred considerable debate and apprehension, particularly among the state's IT department and various stakeholders who claim to be largely uninformed about the bill's details and implications. While the government aims to curb the spread of fake news and misinformation, the lack of transparency and consultation has left many in the dark, raising concerns about potential misuse and infringement on freedom of speech.
The bill, which has been in development for two years, proposes strict penalties for spreading misinformation and fake news, including imprisonment of up to seven years and fines reaching ₹10 lakh. It defines "misinformation" as knowingly or recklessly making false statements of fact, excluding opinions, satire, or artistic expressions not reasonably interpreted as factual. "Fake news" includes misquoting, distorting audio or video, and fabricating content. The bill targets not only individuals but also companies and social media platforms.
A key component of the bill is the establishment of a six-member "Fake News on Social Media Regulatory Authority," chaired by the Minister for Kannada and Culture, with members from the Legislative Assembly, Council, social media platforms, and an IAS officer. This authority will enforce the ban on fake news and abusive content and ensure online content is based on authentic research, particularly in science, history, religion, philosophy, and literature. Special courts, presided over by sessions judges, will expedite legal proceedings, with offenses classified as cognizable and non-bailable.
Despite the bill's extensive scope and potential impact, stakeholders claim a lack of awareness and consultation. The IT department, responsible for the state's technological infrastructure, reportedly lacks detailed information about the bill, raising questions about its preparedness for implementation. This lack of transparency has fueled criticism and concern among digital rights advocates and free speech proponents.
The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) has urged the Karnataka government to reconsider the bill, warning that its provisions could lead to selective enforcement and threaten free speech. Critics are particularly concerned about the broad definitions of "misinformation" and "fake news," as well as the authority's power to determine what constitutes a violation. There are fears that the bill could be used to suppress dissent and criticism of the government. Concerns have also been raised about the bill's provisions regarding content that disrespects "Sanatan symbols and beliefs" or promotes superstition, with critics questioning the definitions of these terms and the potential for misuse.
Supporters argue the bill is necessary to combat the growing menace of online abuse and misinformation, protecting cultural values, individual dignity, and factual reporting. They believe it will safeguard society from content that incites violence, panic, or disrupts public order and electoral processes.
As Karnataka moves forward with this legislation, it faces the challenge of balancing the need to curb misinformation with the protection of fundamental rights. Transparency, stakeholder consultation, and clear definitions are crucial to ensure the bill does not become a tool for censorship or political oppression. The lack of awareness and consultation thus far underscores the need for the government to engage with all stakeholders to address concerns and ensure the bill is implemented fairly and effectively.
