Government officials like Shah Faesel and Ajay Gangwar will have to watch their social media usage

By Asheeta Regidi

Several bureaucrats like Shah Faesel and Amit Kataria have been in the news this year for their controversial comments and views expressed on social media. These have also resulted in action being taken against the officials for violating rules of conduct applicable to them. The Indian Department of Personnel and Training now issued  amendments to the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 (the Conduct Rules), which will extend the applicable restrictions to public media usage by government officials to social media as well. This extension will give the government officials as well as their seniors a benchmark for what they can and cannot do, and will hopefully prevent arbitrary actions like the much criticised transfer of Ajay Gangwar for his praise of Jawaharlal Nehru. What do the AIS Conduct Rules say? The Conduct Rules lay down the standards of conduct to be observed by such government officials. These are applicable to all members of the All India Services, including the IAS, IPS, Indian Forest Service, the Indian Service of Engineers and the Indian medical and health Services. The Rules affecting social media usage and the proposed amendments are as follows: i) Previous sanction is not required to use social media The rules in their present form permit a government official to participate in any public media such as the radio or press without the need for a previous sanction from the government.Acts like publishing a book also do not need sanction. The amendments propose to extend this to the use of any public media, including social media websites, appearances on television, etc. as well. ii) Several restrictions placed on social media usage While previous sanction is not required, the government officials are hardly ‘free’ to use social media as they please. The permission granted is subject to several restrictions, the first being to abide by the Conduct Rules and any other rules applicable to the servant. The second is that the official must make clear that the views expressed are his own, and not of the government. The Conduct Rules contain certain restrictions on the ability of the government servants to criticise the government, which are discussed in detail below. The amendments state that these restrictions are applicable to statements on social media, like Facebook and Twitter, television or any other communication application, which will include apps like SnapChat as well. Statements can be in any form, be it an original post, a share or even a like of a post. The restrictions will also apply to caricatures. Even in the absence of the amendments, these restrictions would have applied to social media usage as well. It appears that the amendments have been included to remove any doubt on the matter. iii)  General Rules The Conduct Rules also include a range of rules on general conduct which will have to observed by government officials in their social media usage. This includes general rules such as not making statements that can affect the unity and integrity of the nation, maintaining high ethical and moral standards, etc. Analysing controversial statements on social media by government officials The most recent government official to be criticised (and lauded at the same time) for his social media statements is Shah Faesel, who severely criticised the media for its portrayal of Kashmir. The Conduct Rules identify three types of statements which are a violation. The first is a statement which is an ‘adverse criticism’ of a recent or current policy or action of the government. For example, an allegation of maladministration practices against senior officials , contained in a court petition, will not fall under this category. Since Faesel’s statements affect the media and not the government, these do not fall afoul of the Conduct Rules. Next, consider the shares on Facebook by the government official Alex Paul Menon of articles supporting Kanhaiya Kumar and RohithVemula. The Conduct Rules require government officials to maintain ‘political neutrality’ in their statements and their conduct. Given the explosive political nature of these incidents, sharing the articles does affect political neutrality. Sharing and liking such articles will also amount to an ‘adverse criticism’ of the current action taken by the government. Ajay Gangwar’s post supporting a leader and freedom fighter like Jawaharlal Nehru, on the other hand cannot be considered to affect the politically neutral stand that is supposed to be taken by government officials. Issue, if any, can be taken with the last statement of Gangwar’s post, which makes a stand on ‘forgiving the Gandhi family’. Making a statement in support or against a political party, whether ruling or in the opposition, cannot be considered to be politically neutral. Other forms of criticism that are not allowed are those which can embarrass or affect the relations between the Central and the State Governments, or those between Indian and foreign governments. What about the Right to Freedom of Speech? Reading these rules, it is clear the government officials will have to give up their right of freedom of speech in order to keep their office. They will now have to watch every action of theirs in order to abide by the Conduct Rules. In view of the position held by government servants, it is natural that a greater responsibility is imposed on them towards their public statements, whether they are official or personal statements. The author is a lawyer with a specialisation in cyber laws and has co-authored books on the subject.