Kalyan Chakroborty writes for DOT :
Those who have any basic knowledge about social media are familiar with the term ‘troll.’ Apart from or alongside fun, trolls might be a digital form of bullying. Sometimes trolls might become so scandalous that the reputation of a person might be at stake. Recently, a contestant of Miss World Bangladesh was subject to such digital form of bullying because of her wrong answers to the judges of that pageant. Not only the people who reached a certain position in society, but sometimes even general people are being subject to such harassment.
How trolls become crimes
When someone posts things on social media that hamper another’s reputation, then it is usually enough to prove that the former intended to hurt the reputation of the latter, since otherwise, why would he do so in the first place? Hence, Mens Rea (intention for crime) is easily provable.
In the Penal Code, 1860, there are punishments for offenses relating to defamation. With reference to Section 354, one posting caddish comments, posts, and statements against women in the name of the troll can be charged for sexual harassment. By interpreting Section 503, it is clear that, if anyone posts any troll with the intention to harm any woman’s reputation then he or she can be punished. Moreover, the modesty of a woman can be questioned through photos and videos that include sexual contents in the name of the troll. Such an act is punishable under Section 509.
Furthermore, it is worth mentioning that an ordinary citizen has the remedy under Section 499 of Penal Code, 1860 that deals with the defamation. However, public figures may not be at a position to have a claim. Although, the following laws are more than enough to tackle this problem that many people are being subjected to.
Section 7 of the Pornography Control Act 2012 mentions that, if any content is seems to be inappropriate in the eyes of the experts, then it will be treated as pornography. Although inappropriateness is a subjective term, however, the act undoubtedly can be used as protection.
Punishment of defamation under the Digital Security Act of 2018 is more severe than other laws. According to a Section 24 of this Act, if a person posts any troll against another via using a fake account on social media and the latter feels threatened, then the former can face imprisonment for five years or be fined Taka five lacs or both. If the crime is repeated by the same person, he shall be punished for seven years of imprisonment or fined Taka 10 lacs or both. According to Section 25 of this Act, if anyone uses website or digital media to intimidate against someone’s reputation, he can be faced with three years of imprisonment or Taka 3 lacs fine as fine or both. In accordance to Section 29, if anyone with the intention to defame someone publishes any content for the first time can be charged with three years in imprisonment or fine Taka 5 lacs or both; for the second time, he can be charged with five years in imprisonment or fine Taka 10 lacs or both. As per Section 28, if anyone posts for the first time, any troll with the intention of hurting religious sentiment, he can be punished with five years in imprisonment or Taka 10 lacs fine or both; for the second time he can be charged with ten years of imprisonment or Taka 20 lacs fine or both. It is noteworthy that offenses with reference to Section 24, 28 and 29 are non-bailable.
How the problem persists
I figured that if I an example would best explain the readers– Ms. A, an ordinary woman posts something on social media and Mr. X, considered that thing a funny one and made a troll using a picture of Ms. A using inappropriate language. On the other hand, Mrs. C is a public figure, and Mr. Z used her face on a morphed video. In both of these circumstances, with every share (trolls from certain popular pages experience an abundance of shares, to the extent of thousands) there is a repetition of defamation. So, one can well be held liable, simply for sharing such troll posts.
Now, the question is, in how many cases do victims file for justice? Given the number of shares, an individual or a group may be targeted, but it is perhaps impossible to file law suits against every sharer (most of who are unlikely to be personally known to the victim) by any of the previously mentioned laws. Plus, targeting an individual or a group may raise questions of personal vengeance.
Therefore, without improving our own mindsets, there is no practical solution to this problem. The laws aforementioned are useful, but without the awareness and education, or the basic etiquettes to show respect to people or their opinions, the real problem shall keep persisting.
The writer is a student of the Department of Law, North South University
Our time is a news portal