EC to issue circular on political parties and social media soon

It is election season and the business of buying popularity online is booming. Free from the watchful eyes of the Election Commission and unencumbered by the model code of conduct, political parties and candidates are locked in a no-holds-barred contest to dominate the digital space and influence opinion online. But those days might soon be over. The Election Commission (EC) has confirmed to Firstpost that “it is considering” comments that it has received on social media and that “very soon the Commission will be issuing some circulars on it.” But how will the EC regulate the use of social media by political parties take? And how will expenses of political campaigns on the social media be assessed? [caption id=“attachment_1174833” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] AP[/caption] Cyber law expert and advocate Virag Gupta says it can be done. Gupta drafted the representation made by political activist Govindacharya (formerly associated with the BJP) and Jagdish Shettigar, former economic advisor to PM (in the NDA government), to the EC on 10 October pertaining to the non-compliance of the election code of conduct by candidates and political parties who are using social media such as Facebook, Google and Twitter to campaign for upcoming assembly elections. Their representation to the EC makes the case that not applying the model code of conduct and Representation of the People Act to the use of social media by political parties and candidates, has “created a parallel world of unlawful communication with heavy investment/expenses which escapes from the domain of the Election Commission of India’s authority” and that it amounts to discrimination of “marginalised candidates.” Gupta identifies four main expenses incurred by candidates and political parties running an online campaign. One, operating expenses (of, for example, hiring someone to operate a twitter account), Two, advertising on social media, Three, buying ‘likes’ and ‘followers’ on twitter (a growing, if controversial fad among candidates) Four, third- party expenses (being spent on behalf or indirectly on the candidate). Says Gupta, “As per Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, all expenditure in connection with the election incurred by candidates and political parties – when common expenses are incurred, are distributed among candidates - have to be accounted for and declared. Section 77 is clear. If it is not done, then it is discriminatory.” Recommending ways how online activity of candidates could be brought under the EC’s scrutiny, Gupta says,  the affidavit that every candidate is required to file along with his nomination paper should also contain details about their social media accounts such as twitter handles, facebook pages, along with their email IDs. “The candidate’s communication on those accounts will then be subject to the model code of conduct. For candidates who have Facebook and Twitter accounts, EC could appoint IT observers,” says Gupta. But what if a third party misuses the candidate’s account, not an uncommon occurrence on the social media? “The candidate has to then immediately lodge a complaint and bring it to the notice of the EC,” say the advocate. Other recommendations made through the representation include mandatory approval by the EC of advertisements in social media (as is the case with print and electronic media), and the issuing of public notice to social media sites and Internet operators that those who directly or indirectly violate the election code of conduct will be liable as per Information Technology Intermediary guideline and rules. What about third party posts that neither candidates or political parties are responsible for? “If a third party is creating nuisance or violating a model code of conduct by posting personal attacks or unverified allegations against a candidate, in the event of a complaint, the social media site should immediately remove the content. If they don’t they are liable for prosecution,” says Gupta. He adds, “Let there be a beginning. Social media is not above the law. The purpose is not to control but to enforce the Representation of the People Act. As per Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution, there has to be equity before law. A candidate in rural India has to comply with the rules, but a candidate in urban India, using social media for campaigning is not answerable. The EC has to have bring all modes of campaigning under its control,” says Gupta. Not surprisingly, political parties and candidates are not pleased at all with the possibility of the EC’s observers shadowing their online campaigns. “We don’t want to get into this debate of imposing censorship under the garb of monitoring. We are very clear on that. But it is not yet clear what the EC’s proposals will be, so one cannot really comment on it", said Arvind Gupta, convenor of BJP’s IT cell, when asked if he would welcome a model code of conduct for how candidates and political parties behave on social media. But given that social media is being used to run election campaigns and influence public opinion, shouldn’t the expenses incurred on it be accounted for? Gupta says, “Social media is not localised. If someone is growing their website organically and if a candidate’s facebook page is being ‘liked’ organically, there is no way of putting a cost to it. What is an expense and what is not will become debatable. It is important to first fully understand how social media works.” Spokesperson for the Congress Party Rajeev Gowda has a different take. He concedes that expenses incurred by candidates for campaigns on social media should be declared but wonders how effective enforcing a model code of conduct will be, given how easy it is to create fake accounts. “Social media started with the premise of potentially being free. This medium can be a leveler by giving candidates access to people without them having to spend to many resources. That still is its potential. But there is another side to this and that is what, perhaps, the EC is focusing on. That fact is social media may also involve spending resources. Someone with the ability to hire a social media marketing company will be able to push his or her case much better. Then you have playing field that is not level anymore. In that sense, the EC may have point,” says Gowda. Asked whether enforcing a model code conduct will have a positive impact and if political parties would be open to such an idea, Gowda said, “In some ways, it is a good thing. But then again, it may be pointless because there are enough ways of creating fake accounts. It won’t necessarily change the game.”