Children have a fundamental right to internet access, blanket bans disproportionate: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled that children possess a fundamental right to access the internet, contradicting blanket restrictions imposed in the name of safety. The court emphasized that blocking children's internet access undermines their freedom, privacy, and ability to seek help when encountering online abuse. The court explained that the right to access and use the internet is derived from Article 21 and the freedom of speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

This decision comes amidst growing controversy over restricting children's access to social media, including calls for minimum-age requirements. The court rejected such prohibitions as ineffective and potentially counterproductive, as they drive children towards less regulated online spaces where they may face greater dangers. The court stressed that the right to access the internet is essential for children, particularly those in remote areas or with special needs, as it provides them with learning, expression, and social connections.

The court also warned that restricting children's internet access would not necessarily make them safer, as they would likely move to unregulated platforms that could be even more hazardous. Instead, the court proposed a framework that prioritizes parental consent, guidance, and oversight, along with "child mode" options for social media accounts.

These accounts could have default privacy settings, restrict contacts and messages from unknown adults, and moderate advertising and content accessible to children. The court also highlighted the importance of addressing the responsibility of those responsible for exposing children to harm rather than placing the burden on the children themselves.