A court battle in India has shed light on the practice of internet shutdowns by authorities

A court battle in Manipur, a violence-stricken state in northeastern India, has highlighted the issue of internet shutdowns by authorities.

The Manipur high court recently ordered a partial lifting of the internet ban, which had been in place for over two months following clashes between tribal groups.

Experts argue that these shutdowns actually contribute to the spread of misinformation rather than curbing it.

The conflict in Manipur involves the Kuki-Zo and Meitei tribal groups.

The government imposed the internet shutdown after violence erupted over a court order granting Scheduled Tribe status to the Meiteis, who are predominantly Hindu and want land rights in the hills.

This has led to a sharp divide, with Meiteis leaving the hills and Kuki-Zo residents leaving the state due to violence in the valley.

India has a high number of internet shutdowns, with 127 instances between January 2020 and December 2022, according to Human Rights Watch and the Internet Freedom Foundation.

These shutdowns are often justified as a means to prevent violence and rumors, but critics argue that they impede the country’s digital economy and limit access to work and public services.

Videos of the violence in Manipur spread before the internet shutdown, suggesting “state-sponsored violence.”

The central government took control of security in the hills, and accusations of biased media coverage have surfaced.

Limited access to information has resulted in unequal representation, with some media outlets in the Meitei-dominated valley having internet access while hill-based news outlets face constraints.

The internet ban in Manipur has marginalized tribal communities, leading to misrepresentation and a lack of understanding of their viewpoints and experiences during the shutdown.

While some residents believe lifting the curbs would escalate tensions, others argue that local communication networks can serve as a means of verification even without internet access.

Critics maintain that internet shutdowns do not effectively address emergencies or ensure public safety.