Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{191456,
        author = {Arjit Srivastav},
        title = {Networked Democracy: Ensuring Freedom of Expression through Constitutionalism and Digital Public Sphere},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {},
        volume = {12},
        number = {no},
        pages = {52-60},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=191456},
        abstract = {India is on its way to become one of the largest digital democracies in the world by the end of 2026 with more than 1200 million people online . The manner in which citizens participate and express their issues and concerns has transformed through technology and the digital world. Certainly, at one time there was media that was used as a platform to share experiences and opinions. However, that is not the case anymore. Digital sphere is known as the place to organize, express and debate now. 
Such a power transfer raises an important question that who makes the calls in cyberspace. The most important part of our democracy which receive through our constitution is speaking right. Innocent individuals are being targeted that increase a chilling impact on the freedom of speech and expression online. However, the online world has established certain boundaries of this freedom through algorithms, data tracking and moderation regime which unknown to most of us. This research piece explores the way in which power is being institutionalized and freedom individualized. Further assessing the impact of processes on institutional power and individual liberty. We might think that how process (limiting institutional power) materializes freedom (at individual level). Each of these processes has signalled to create a contrasting representation of freedom. Article 19(1)(a) on free speech must work to enhance transparency and accountability in data surveillance, algorithmic control or platform moderation. The courts have resisted more frontal attacks by the state, as judicial precedents reveal. However, it is not yet engaged with the more insidious and subtle restrictions on our speech in the world of internet.
So far, most of what has been written sees censorship as something done only by the state. In today's interconnected society, business interests, algorithms and companies have a lot to do with speech. While profiling and personalized feeds now influence what people see and believe, privacy, data protection and freedom of expression overlap remain under-explored. The research draws inspiration from the European AI Act and the Digital Services Act for possible parallels in India, with a consistent focus on India’s institutions and reality.
This paper examines this issue through doctrinal and comparative analysis such as the existing statutes and practical functioning of the legislative decisions while comparing international frameworks like the European Digital Draft, commentaries of scholars and views of policy experts dealing with this issue. Further, transparency reports of various platforms help us to understand how the rules about speech play out in practice.
Ultimately, the paper advocates for a digital constitutional framework founded on the transparency, accountability, and fairness of three straightforward ideas. The decisions taken by the state and other platforms should be open, adequate and limited by the following principles. The paper advocates that protecting free speech online is not only about individual liberty about safeguarding India’s democratic integrity.},
        keywords = {Digital Constitutionalism, Freedom of expression, Article 19(1)(a), Digital Public Sphere, Algorithmic Governance, Platform regulation, Data surveillance.},
        month = {},
        }