After the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) came up with the draft Indian Telecommunication Bill, 2022 last week, Internet activists in India have raised serious apprehensions regarding certain provisions of the bill. The Minister of Communications, Electronic and Information Technology has assured that the final bill will take shape in over six months — allowing the due time for rigorous consultation process. The telecom bill may have a sweeping effect on the industry. Therefore, all the concerned stakeholders are expected to put forth their apprehensions and suggestions to ensure a comprehensive outcome by the end. The spirit behind introducing the draft bill is to shed the colonial baggage, as the telecom sector in India is still governed by British-era laws including Indian Telegraph Act 1885 and Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act 1933. The prime objective of the bill, however, is more pragmatic — to realign and sync the regulatory framework with present-day requirements. The Internet today has become a dominant tool of telecommunication — almost equalling the domain of traditional telecom providers in some regions. Against this background, the government has decided to bring internet-based and over-the-top (OTT) telecommunication tools — like WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal etc. — under the ambit of licensing regime. In fact, this has been a long-standing demand of traditional telecom providers on the grounds of parity, as they are already subjected to licensing and other norms. One may argue that regulation of internet-based and OTT telecommunication platforms must be brought under the broader regulatory framework. This argument is not wrong. But at the same time, how prudent it will be to chase OTT platforms and traditional telecom providers with the same stick when challenges and intricacies of the both differ? Under the garb of 'national security', the draft bill suggests interception of transmitted messages on end-to-end encrypted platforms in restricted circumstances. This goes against the defining nature of such platforms. It may be recollected that not long ago, WhatsApp had dragged the Centre in court on the issue of traceability. Though the concerned ministry has denied efforts at decryption, the Internet Freedom Foundation has highlighted that "encryption is also undermined by Clause 4(7) and 4(8) of the Bill." If at all, the government is planning for systematic decryption of end-to-end encrypted messages, it needs to be careful. It had already received heavy backlash on similar grounds from various stakeholders after the promulgation of Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Directly linked to decryption of messages is the issue of infringement of right to privacy — enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, established after the Supreme Court's 2017 ruling. OTT telecommunication tools may be serving the same purpose as traditional telecom providers but the nature of their functioning is quite different. A mere expansion of definition to include the new-age telecommunication tools — as part of regulatory reforms — is far too simplistic. The government must contemplate innovative methods of regulation that would factor in the complexities of the OTT and internet-based tools. Another major concern around the draft bill is that the Department of Telecommunication seeks to give itself extra powers by tweaking the role of the telecom regulator — Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). It appears that the government is facing trouble in coming to terms with the fact that a high-handed approach in regulating a critical sector like telecom is now a thing of the past. It is baffling that even after being blessed with a seven-decade old thriving democratic legacy, policymakers don't appear confident enough in the success of decentralisation — a core principle of democracy. The tendency to retain centralised control over institutions and resources reeks of a colonial baggage that India consistently denounces, in words. However, the most blatant provision of the draft bill is the one pertaining to internet suspension. Clause 24(2) of Chapter six of the bill allows the Central Government or state governments to order the suspension of communication services on any "telecom network" in case of "public emergency or in the interest of the public safety". This certainly sounds discouraging for a nation that has been already dubbed as the "internet shutdown capital of India". The draft bill requires a fair bit of modification before it makes it to the Parliament. Let suggestions float in from all quarters.