Mobile Internet has been shut in parts of Delhi+reduced to 2G for rest,since mid-day yesterday. I'm tweeting via WiFi,which is a privilege in India with ~99% on mobile Internet.

Not commenting on farmer protests but here's thread on how I think about Internet Shutdowns:

1. Shutting down the Internet is an act of desperation: an action where the government admits that it is unable to maintain law and order, is panicking, doesn't know what to do.
2. An Internet shutdown is a curfew: it is a blunt instrument & an indication of government failure.
+

We tend to accept such acts because we're used to government failures in India.

3. India has had the highest number of Internet Shutdowns, prior to pandemic: Over 100 a year for a few years. Has had the longest shutdowns in the world - including in Darjeeling and Kashmir.
+

These are all significant government failures.
4. AFAIK, this is the 2nd time the Internet has been shut down in the capital of the India, and it is the 2nd time within a year that it has happened. Last time was during the CAA-NRC protests.
+

5. An Internet shutdown is a suspension of our fundamental right to free speech. When the medium of enabling speech such as the Internet is shut, it has a disproportionate effect of censorship. 2G barely works, so it is no different from an Internet Shutdown.

+

6. There is no established correlation between an Internet Shutdown & the ability to maintain law & order. There is no research which indicates its effectiveness of Internet Shutdowns, only the cost of one: for biz, students, families. Often cant contact friends & family.
+

7. In case of longer Internet Shutdowns, for ex, in Darjeeling or Kashmir, businesses have been shuttered. Digital India=virtual college applications, digital payments,digital tax filings. Everything gets effected. Such government failures have a disproportionate impact now.
+

8. Most importantly, you shut down avenues of communication such as the Internet under two circumstances: either you want to stop info being shared privately (such as a call to arms), or you want info from being made public (such as police brutality).
+

8. While a call to arms would be illegal, I'm not sure whether pre-censorship here should be legal, unless there's a clear & present danger, based hard facts that the Internet is being used to disrupt law & order, and there's NOTHING ELSE you can do to address this,except +

shut the Internet down as a LAST RECOURSE. Is the decision to suspend our fundamental rights here a proportionate one? There should be scrutiny & transparency regarding this adjudication post-facto. If the decision to shut down Internet is legitimate, governments should have
+

no issues regarding transparency. There should be either bipartisan political oversight, or judicial scrutiny.

9. If the decision is being taken keeping in mind prevention of public airing of police brutality, then of course, that is illegal, & transparency should act as a
+

preventive measure here.

10. Unfortunately, like many things government (including consultations on policy issues) there is no transparency and accountability regarding Internet Shutdowns, re decisions taken. Even the orders to shut down the Internet aren't made public by govt.