INTRODUCTION
With advancements in the field of technology, the Internet is now a very essential part of the everyday life of people around the globe. Approximately 5.56 billion internet users in early 2025, which is about 68.7% of the world’s population, depend on the internet.[1] The internet has brought people of various communities together and has opened various opportunities for people cannot be viewed as something which can be obtained through privilege, but it should be viewed as one of the lifelines of our lives. The internet is a vital resource that is a way to access other vital resources, pursue their work or education, partner with others, and take part in commercial activities. It is suggested that with the increase in the use of the internet in our everyday lives, it has become a part of us, and it has become a way of integrating us into this evolving society. Without the internet, we would not be able to integrate and indulge in the ever-evolving society. It is not only a matter of using the internet for our entertainment, but our every single task depends upon it. This is exactly what this blog talks about that it is now time to make internet access a full-fledged fundamental right, which is granted to every citizen in our country, and not because they have the luxury to afford it.
India will have more than 900 million internet users by 2025, out of which will be from rural areas, because of the growth in the number of mobile phones, as they are available at an affordable price.[2] This further proves how much it is required to discuss bringing internet facilities within the purview of basic rights, which we are going to do in this blog. Continuing further in this blog, we are going to talk about whether internet access, in absolute and independent terms, should be given the status of a fundamental right or not.
UNDERSTANDING INTERNET ACCESS AS A RIGHT
Right to internet access or freedom to connect is the belief that everybody should be in a position to access the Internet to exercise and enjoy their right of freedom of expression and opinion, and other basic human rights, which states should provide broad access to the Internet, and states should not unnecessarily limit a person’s access to the Internet.
Now, the characteristic of this right can be considered in two ways, which are:
1) Positive Right
2) Negative right
Positive right gives a person the right to make a claim, while negative rights are the rights that are automatically given to us; in short, we are entitled to these rights because we are human beings, for instance, freedom of speech, right to equality, etc.
On the surface, we can place “Right to the Internet” as a positive right as being a right in which a person asserts to have broadband access, but if we consider the issue Internet as one of the leading channels to utilise the negative rights and thereby can be well encompassed under this category. This adverse relation of the right can be done well and is also accepted by the international community. This has not yet been explored fully by India when compared to other nations, which have been continuously debating and implementing measures to introduce internet access as a basic right.
In the summer of 2016, the United Nations Human Rights Council published a non-binding resolution that denounced the systematic interruption of internet access by governments and proclaimed access a “Human right.”[3] It also proclaimed that “the Internet is one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information, and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies.”[4]
Several countries have enacted legislation that imposes a duty on the state to strive to provide access to the Internet on a widespread basis, outweighing or inhibiting the state from unreasonably limiting the access of an individual to information and the Internet:
1) ESTONIA: In 2000, the legislature launched a grand initiative to take the Internet into rural areas. The government claims that the internet has now become a necessity in this century.[5]
2) FINLAND: Finland was the world’s first country to make citizens legally entitled to the right to internet access in 2010. All residents of Finland were to have access to a one-megabit-per-second broadband, and by 2015 to a 100 Mbit/s connection, based on the Ministry of Transport and Communications.[6]
NATURE OF RIGHT TO INTERNET ACCESS IN THE INDIAN CONTEXT
Likewise, in the Indian Context, it refers to legally providing every person with a right to use the internet, similar to speech or education, under Part III of the Indian Constitution. But as of yet, India has not been discussing it in full force compared to other nations, which have been incessantly talking and working on providing internet access as a human right. Internet connectivity isn’t directly stated as a basic right in the Constitution; hence, it can’t be considered a positive right (a guaranteed and written right).
But it can be considered a “derivative right”—a right that is required to achieve the objectives of the Constitution. In the law of America, such rights are referred to as ‘penumbral’ or ‘unenumerated’ rights, and the same thing applies in India as well. The Supreme Court has broadened the connotation of fundamental rights through the years by encompassing many basic elements within Article 21, such as [7]the right to sleep, the right to a hygienic environment, and the right to privacy[8]. This may be achieved by making changes by proclaiming it to be an independent basic right or by considering it as a vital component of pre-existing rights, for example, the Right to Life (Article 21)[9] and the Right to Freedom of Speech (Article 19(1)(a))[10].
1) IN RELATION WITH ARTICLE 19 (1) (a) AND ARTICLE 19 (1)(g):
Recently, the Supreme Court has also confirmed the “Right to access the internet” as a part of this article and Article 19(1)(g)[11], which grants all the citizens of the country the right to pursue any profession, or to engage in any occupation, trade, or business.
In the Landmark Judgement of In Anuradha Bhasin V/S Union of India[12], the Supreme Court Ruled:
“We hold that the freedom of speech and expression and freedom to follow any profession or engage in any trade, business or vocation through the medium of the internet is afforded constitutional protection under Article 19 (1)(a) and Article 19 (1)(g). The limitation on such basic rights must be in tune with the requirement under Article 19(2)[13] and 19(6)[14] of the Constitution, including the test of proportionality.”
The government has to adhere to the proportionality test as described in the case of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India[15], if it wishes to limit the right to freedom of speech or conduct business through the Internet under Article 19. According to this test,
1) The law should have a legitimate and legal goal that benefits the state.
2) The limitation has to be logically related to the objective that the state aims to attain.
3) The limitation has to be necessary and cannot exceed that which is required to achieve the objective.
4) It has not only to be for a good reason but also to be the least severe and sole method of attaining that objective.
5) The state also has to accord adequate legal safeguards and procedures to individuals affected.
2) CONCERNING ARTICLE 21
The Allahabad High Court recently moved Suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against Uttar Pradesh for suspending internet service, rightly observing that “the right to have continuous Internet service in the present era is an extension of the right to live and, as such, discontinuation of that is in violation of Article 21[16] of the Constitution of India.”[17]
The Kerala High Court earlier was of the same view in the case of Faheema Shirin V/S State of Kerala[18], where they held that the right to the internet is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution, along with the right to privacy and education.
CONCLUSION:
As India is heading for a digitally evolved Era, access to the internet is no longer a luxury but the need of the hour; it has become a necessity. By declaring internet access a fundamental right, the majority of the population already enjoying it would still enjoy it, but the marginalised and undeserving sections of the population, including students, digital workers, and rural communities, would most benefit from it. For them, the internet is the umbilical cord that connects them and a lifeline that enables them to access education, employment, and equal involvement in society. However, there is still a digital divide wherein most of the rural regions are isolated from the actual the world because of weak or no internet connection. By considering internet access a human right, we would be contributing to a more inclusive and equitable society.
Author(s) Name: NAME: Vrinda Gupta (Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management Studies)
References:
[1] Ani Petrosyan, ‘Internet usage worldwide – statistics & facts'(Statista,11 April 2025) <Internet usage worldwide | Statista > accessed 12 July 2025
[2] Tanushree Basuroy, ‘Internet usage in India – statistics & facts'( Statista, 18 September 2024) < Internet usage in India – statistics & facts | Statista> accessed 12 July 2025
[3] Kyle McKenney, ‘The UN Declares Internet Access a Basic Human Right’ (Paste Magazine,5 July 2016) < The UN Declares Internet Access a Basic Human Right – Paste Magazine > accessed 12 July 2025
[4] Frank La Rue, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression: Addendum, Communications to and from Governments’ UNHRC A/HRC/17/27 (16 May 2011) < Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression: Addendum, Communications to and from Governments | Refworld > accessed 12 July 2025.
[5] Colin Woodard, ‘ Estonia, where being wired is a human right’ (The Christian Science Monitor,1 July 2003) < Estonia, where being wired is a human right – CSMonitor.com> accessed 12 July 2025
[6] Don Reisinger, ‘Finland makes 1Mb broadband access a legal right’ (CNet News,14 October 2009) < Finland makes 1Mb broadband access a legal right | Webware – CNET> accessed 12 July 2025
[7] Re-Ramlila Maidan Incident Dt … vs Home Secretary and Ors (2012) 5 SCC 1
[8] Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors (2017) 10 SCC 1
[9] The Constitution of India 1950, art 21
[10] The Constitution of India 1950, art 19(1)(a)
[11] The Constitution of India 1950, art 19(1)(g)
[12] Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637
[13] The Constitution of India 1950, art 19(2)
[14] The Constitution of India 1950, art 19(6)
[15] Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors (2017) 10 SCC
[16] The Constitution of India 1950, art 21
[17] Meera Emmanuel, ‘Right to continuous internet part of right to live: Allahabad HC registers suo motu PIL over suspension of internet in UP ‘ (Bar And Bench,4 January 2020) < Allahabad HC issues suo motu PIL over suspension of internet in UP> accessed 12 July 2025
[18] Faheema Shirin R.K. v. State of Kerala (2019) SCC OnLine Ker 2976
