Author: Ms. Somya Gupta, Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies affiliated to GGSIPU
To the Point
Technology has become an inseparable part of human civilization, continuously reshaping how societies interact and how politics functions. From the printing press to artificial intelligence, technological revolutions have historically altered governance, social relations, and the global order. Society has always been impacted by technology, as each invention influences how people relate to one another, how cultures expand or decline, how cities grow, and even who controls wealth and resources. In the modern era, the digital revolution has brought immense opportunities—such as e-governance, global connectivity, and improved access to information—while also raising challenges including misinformation, privacy concerns, and political polarization. Technology has undeniably improved the general standard of living in the last few decades, enabling people to connect across borders and transforming education, employment, and communication. Without it, individuals would still be confined within the geographical limits of their societies. Innovations such as the internet, smartphones, tablets, television, streaming platforms, and video games have made life more convenient and engaging. Yet, alongside these positive contributions, technology has also produced negative effects, such as widening inequality, overdependence on devices, social alienation, and cultural disruption. Thus, while technology has become a driving force of human progress, it also remains a double-edged sword that requires careful and responsible use.
Abstract
This article explores the profound impact of digital technology on society and politics, showing how innovations in communication, education, governance, economy, and global relations have reshaped public life. While digital tools promote transparency, accessibility, and civic participation, they also introduce risks such as misinformation, cyber threats, algorithmic bias, and surveillance. The discussion highlights technology’s double-edged nature: it can democratize voices and enhance political engagement, yet it also threatens democratic values and deepens divisions if unchecked. Through legal analysis and real-world examples, including contemporary political and judicial developments, the article examines how existing legal frameworks struggle to keep pace with technological change and the challenges of balancing innovation with rights and freedoms.
Use of Legal Jargon
Technological disruption increasingly engages with doctrines of digital sovereignty, cyber jurisprudence, data protection, surveillance regulation, and electoral integrity. Statutory frameworks such as the Information Technology Act, 2000 (India), the General Data Protection Regulation (EU), and comparable cyber security regimes attempt to mediate the constitutional implications of digital technologies. Fundamental rights—including freedom of speech, the right to privacy, and the right to information—are now filtered through digital infrastructures, generating complex constitutional adjudication. Emerging modalities like data analytics, machine learning, and blockchain strain existing statutory and constitutional doctrines, compelling courts and legislatures to reconcile rapid technological innovation with entrenched legal safeguards. Instruments such as the IT Act, GDPR, and national privacy laws are continually tested by surveillance expansion, algorithmic governance, and digital manipulation. Consequently, foundational principles of due process, transparency, accountability, and freedom of expression demand reinterpretation within this evolving digital-constitutional order, necessitating a reconfiguration of protections for privacy and democratic participation.
The Proof
Societal Transformation: Technology has widened access to education through e-learning, transformed work through automation, and reshaped culture via social media. However, the digital divide continues to marginalize those without access, raising concerns of equality under Article 14 and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Political Communication & Campaigning: Social media enables leaders to directly reach citizens, changing the nature of political mobilization. Targeted advertising and voter profiling, as seen in data-driven campaigns, implicate data protection laws such as the GDPR (EU) and Sections 43A and 72A of the IT Act, 2000 (India). Electoral fairness is also tested under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which regulates undue influence.
Governance & Accountability: Initiatives like Aadhaar and blockchain-based voting aim to make governance more efficient and transparent. Open data projects support accountability and oversight, but surveillance and mass data collection raise constitutional questions under Article 21 relating to privacy.
Cyber security & Electoral Integrity: Cyber-attacks, hacking of political databases, and digital espionage threaten sovereignty and electoral integrity. These risks are addressed through provisions of the IT Act, 2000, the Indian Penal Code, and Election Commission regulations, while international efforts include the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime.
Algorithmic Bias & Misinformation: AI-driven decision-making can perpetuate bias, raising equality concerns under Article 14. Disinformation and echo chambers undermine public debate and fall within the scope of Article 19(1)(a) on free speech, subject to restrictions under Article 19(2). Platform liability continues to evolve under frameworks such as India’s Intermediary Guidelines, 2021, and global standards like the US Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Case Laws
1. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India [(2018) 1 SCC 809]
The Supreme Court’s historic ruling reinforced the right to privacy as a basic freedom guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
Retired judge Justice K.S. Puttaswamy filed the lawsuit, arguing that the Aadhaar biometric identification system breached privacy and was therefore unconstitutional. The law was unclear because of earlier decisions in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh, which concluded that privacy was not a fundamental right that was secured. Because of the significance of the issue, a nine-judge panel was brought in to determine whether or not privacy was protected by the constitution. The main topic of discussion was whether or not privacy is a necessary component of the Article 21 right to life and personal liberty.
Judgment
On 24 August 2017, the Court reached a unanimous decision stating that privacy is a fundamental aspect of the right to life and liberty, along with other rights outlined in Part III of the Constitution. This ruling set aside previous decisions and affirmed that privacy is essential for maintaining dignity and autonomy, although it is not an absolute right. Any limitations imposed must meet the criteria of legality, necessity, and proportionality. The Court also underlined that private organizations and the government can both have privacy concerns in the digital era. This opinion laid the groundwork for India’s privacy jurisprudence and impacted later decisions on issues like gender rights, sexual orientation, and informational privacy.
2. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [(2015) 5 SCC 1]
It marks a significant development in India’s digital rights legal framework, annulling Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000 due to its infringement on free speech under Article 19(1)(a). The case underscored how ambiguous laws that govern online communication can inhibit political dissent, satire, and criticism on social media. By criminalizing “offensive” or “annoying” messages, Section 66A granted authorities excessive power, resulting in a chilling effect on democratic discourse in the digital domain.
Judgment
The Supreme Court determined that online expression should receive the same constitutional safeguards as offline speech, clarifying that technology cannot serve as a means for arbitrary censorship. While Section 79 was modified to safeguard intermediaries and Section 69A (content blocking) was maintained with precautions, the overall ruling enhanced accountability in digital governance. This ruling demonstrates the need for law to evolve alongside technology: ensuring that digital platforms continue to facilitate free political discussion while preventing the abuse of government authority. It also mirrors the wider challenge of balancing innovation, regulation, and democratic freedoms in today’s digital landscape.
Conclusion
Technology has emerged as a transformative influence, altering law, politics, and society across all levels. It broadens access to information, enhances democratic engagement, and promotes better governance through transparency and efficacy. However, these same tools can also facilitate surveillance, algorithmic discrimination, misinformation, and societal polarization, which present significant threats to constitutional rights. Current laws frequently fall short, necessitating that courts and legislators reassess principles like privacy, free speech, and due process in the digital context. The challenge lies in achieving equilibrium: developing regulatory, ethical, and educational frameworks that uphold rights while fostering innovation. Technology must be directed by principles of accountability and inclusivity, ensuring it empowers rather than divides. The future of democracy will hinge on integrating constitutional values into the foundation of digital governance, ensuring that advancements are aligned with justice, equality, and human dignity.
FAQS
Q1. In what ways has technology altered society and politics?
Technology has changed how we communicate, learn, work, and engage with culture, while also influencing politics through online campaigning, digital governance, and increased civic engagement. It enhances connectivity and transparency but also exacerbates the digital divide and facilitates the spread of misinformation.
Q2. What dangers and legal issues does it introduce?
While digital tools make political engagement more participatory, data-driven campaigns, micro-targeting, and social media algorithms raise concerns about privacy, consent, and fairness. Various laws and regulations, such as the IT Act, GDPR, and constitutional protections for free speech and privacy, aim to tackle these concerns, but enforcing them poses challenges.
Q3. How are courts addressing technological threats?
Courts are becoming more aware of digital risks such as surveillance, spyware, and cyber manipulation, striving to strike a balance between state interests and fundamental rights, often advocating for updated laws to safeguard privacy and democratic freedoms.
Q4. Can technology enhance democracy?
Indeed, technology can strengthen democracy through e-governance, increased transparency, and expanded civic engagement. It can elevate the voices of marginalized groups and contribute to a more inclusive democracy; however, unchecked usage can lead to polarization, manipulation, and potential oppression.
Q5. What measures are necessary?
It is crucial to establish stronger data protection regulations, enhance cybersecurity protocols, implement ethical AI guidelines, and promote digital literacy programs. Regulatory and educational frameworks should ensure that technology fosters innovation and inclusion while protecting constitutional rights and democratic principles.
