Articles features
Can Internet be allowed to spell death for the unborn girl child?
The low and declining sex ratio in the country is no longer a subject 
matter of debate or doubt. The child (0-6 years) sex ratio has declined 
from 962 in 1981 to 945 in 1991, 927 in 2001 and to 918 in 2011. If we 
had the same sex ratio in 2011 as in 1981 we would have had 3.9 million 
more girls. This is the number of girl children that have been 
eliminated. The danger is real and present and needs urgent response.
It
 is no longer a secret that medical mercenaries determine the sex of the
 foetus and disclose it to the parents. They do so for profit and in 
violation of the law. An estimated 500,000 to 600,000 girl children are 
eliminated by sex-selective abortions every year through nearly twice 
the number of sonographies - making it a million rupee industry.
Lucrative
 profit margins have made MNCs actively aid and abet this "crime for 
profit" - whether it is the suppliers of ultrasound machines or those 
facilitating advertisements on the internet or through search engines. 
The problem continues unabated.
But today we are at the cusp of 
an opportunity. For the first time in so many decades, a prime minister 
has recognized the problem from the ramparts of the Red Fort and has 
asked the doctors not to fill their coffers by killing the unborn girl 
child. He went a step further in Panipat on January 22 and asked the 
people whether they would like to eat their bread with the very hands 
that were soiled with the blood of the unborn girl child. How much more 
forthright can a prime minister be?
And it has not just been 
rhetoric. On January 22 the prime minister himself launched the Beti 
Bachao, Beti Padhao (Save the Daughter, Educate her) as a flagship 
campaign from Panipat in Haryana, challenging the problem at its very 
epicenter. It is both a bold gamble and an unprecedented opportunity.
But
 let us pause and see how Internet search engines are faring in this 
battle. Under the law, advertisements offering sex determination 
services are prohibited in India. While the advertisements in print and 
television have practically disappeared due to the intervention of 
courts, the internet has become a source of vigorous promotion of sex 
selection. Various search engines have become equal opportunity 
offenders by simultaneously targeting different segments of Indian 
society. For the elite, they target advertisements from clinics in 
Bangkok and Dubai as also Cyprus, Britain and the US. For the middle 
class, ordering of online kits has been made easier by providing easy 
access to various links from trillions of internet pages. For the 
astrologically inclined there is a vast treasure of mantras, suitable 
tithis (dates) and the like, not to speak of the Chinese gender charts 
and ovulation advice et al.
The Supreme Court of India, 
responding to a PIL filed in February 2000, took a number of pro-active 
measures and issued appropriate directions to the authorities concerned .
 But the issue of Internet advertisements had, until quite recently, 
remained intractable - mostly due to the complex and technical nature of
 the operation of the net.
Unlike print or electronic media where 
advertisements are viewed by the entire public, the Internet facilitates
 direct targeting of only interested persons. Thus there is no public 
outrage caused when individuals in their private space access 
information and services and commit the crime of sex selection.
While
 the response of the ministries concerned had earlier been less decisive
 on the technical and legal aspects of the issue, the IT and health 
ministries have in a couple of recent hearings taken a clear and firm 
stand against the Internet giants. To some extent, this was also 
facilitated by the recent developments in the US and Europe, where these
 search engine giants have complied with the directions of various 
courts to disallow certain contents violative of local laws.
The game
 becomes different when these companies face Indian courts. One of the 
companies had initially argued that the Indian courts have no 
jurisdiction since their servers were located in the US. Interestingly, 
some of the search engine companies have stated before the US Congress 
that they are bound by the local laws of the destination countries.
Yet,
 we find these giants dragging their feet in following the directions of
 the Supreme Court in India - for instance, its order of December 4, 
2014. One finds some of the offending advertisements not being removed 
from the net. On January 28, a two-judge bench gave unambiguous 
directions to Google, Yahoo and Microsoft that they "shall not advertise
 or sponsor any advertisement" that violates the law.
What should
 we do next? Remain vigilant and check the violations on the net and 
then file contempt petitions before the Supreme Court with concrete 
evidence through printouts and details of the route followed on the net 
to reach the advertisements. The violations of Supreme Court orders 
amount to contempt - nothing more, nothing less. We must therefore bring
 each contempt to the notice of the court. Eternal vigilance is the 
price of liberty - in the present crisis, it is the price of survival 
itself!
But is that the only way to be explored? No. These 
Internet giants also understand the language of markets and profits. 
After all they abet violation of the law because of profits, However, 
the profits of these companies come from their subscriber base. So, they
 sure will understand the language of consumer boycott. Imagine what 
will happen if civil society, college and school going girls and boys 
and conscientious users start putting these search engines on notice 
that they will discontinue using their search engines if they do not 
stop aiding and abetting the foeticide service providers. The search 
engines will surely see reason. They must be told that they have enough 
avenues of making money. Abetting the elimination of millions of girl 
children is the least honourable among these.
The Fourth Battle 
of Panipat has begun. These net giants, and we, their consumers, have to
 decide whether they stand with the daughters of India or stand against 
them. Let us fire the first salvo.
(31.3.2015. Satish B Agnihotri
 is a retired senior civil servant. The views expressed are personal. He
 can be contacted at sbagnihotri@gmail.com )
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	