Govt Should Take a Relaxed View of Violations of Flag Code in Products Sold in Foreign Countries, Experts Say

Govt Should Take a Relaxed View of Violations of Flag Code in Products Sold in Foreign Countries, Experts Say is a report published in The Economic Times on 13 January 2017. The piece examines the legal, cultural and regulatory questions surrounding incidents where products sold on foreign ecommerce platforms appear to violate India’s flag code. Experts, including Sunil Abraham, highlight how intermediary liability protections, territorial limits of Indian law and broader global norms around creative expression complicate punitive responses.

Contents

  1. Article Details
  2. Full Text
  3. Context and Background
  4. External Link

Article Details

📰 Published in:
The Economic Times
✍️ Author:
Neha Alawadhi
📅 Date:
13 January 2017
📄 Type:
News Report
📰 Newspaper Link:
Read Online

Full Text

Synopsis
Sushma Swaraj had on Wednesday tweeted that India visas for Amazon executives may be withdrawn unless the ecommerce giant apologised.

NEW DELHI: When it comes to products on sale in global ecommerce vendor sites that seem to violate India's strict flag code, the government should take a more relaxed and less punitive approach.

That's the view of industry observers and lawyers familiar with internal business practices and regulation.

India's External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had on Wednesday tweeted that India visas for Amazon executives may be withdrawn unless the America headquartered ecommerce giant apologised for its Canadian site selling doormats in India flag colours.

The point, lawyers and experts say, is that Indian law itself protects Amazon from being prosecuted in this case. India recognises companies like Amazon (whether in India or Canada), as intermediaries, who are exempt from liability under the IT (Information Technology) Act, because a third-party seller was selling those doormats.

Plus, Indian law does not apply outside the country, and a global ecommerce company has millions of products for sale in scores of marketplaces.

"Neither Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 nor the Flag Code applies outside India," said Virag Gupta, a Supreme Court advocate specialising in cyber law.

The only thing the Indian government can do, said Sarvjeet Singh, programme manager, Centre for Communication Governance, National Law University, Delhi, is to ask the company to take down the listing.

That Amazon had already done, he noted. "Given the volume of traffic and usage and the number of sellers, it is impossible for a company to monitor all the goods listed," Singh added, and said that's why the IT Act recognises that companies like Amazon are intermediaries.

Many experts also wondered whether India's flag code is ready for a reset, aligning it more with today's less statist views on such matters.

The code calls for a three-year jail term, or a fine, or both for violations. In democracies such as the United States, Canada and the Netherlands, national flag colours in product design does not invoke legal punitive responses. "In a lot of these countries, where issues about Indian flag code violation have come up, these activities are legal and covered by freedom of expression guarantees and we should be aware of these cultural contexts before making statements," Singh said.

Others feel the flag code smothers creativity. "Repealing most flag-related regulation will unlock creativity, encourage derivative works and remix and greatly increase the visibility of the Indian flag in public places. This in turn will foster a sense of community, national pride and social cohesion," said Sunil Abraham, executive director at Bengaluru-based research organisation, the Centre for Internet and Society.

Back to Top ⇧

Context and Background

This story captures a moment when global ecommerce platforms, freedom of expression norms and India’s statutory framework collided in the public sphere. The controversy hinged on a familiar tension: national symbolism meeting cross-border digital commerce. While public sentiment often demands strong action, the article shows how territorial limits of Indian law and intermediary protections under the IT Act constrain what the government can legally enforce.

Experts quoted in the report argue that a punitive approach risks overlooking the cultural and legal context of other democracies, where the use of national symbols in creative or commercial products is generally permissible. Sunil Abraham’s remarks go further, suggesting that rigid regulation may actually suppress creativity and reduce the organic visibility of national symbols—counterproductive outcomes if the goal is to foster civic pride and shared identity.

The article therefore reflects both a legal debate and a broader cultural conversation about how national symbols should be treated in an interconnected world.

📄 This page was created on 11 December 2025. You can view its history on GitHub, preview the fileTip: Press Alt+Shift+G, or inspect the .