Following the order, the Government of India began to impose restriction which ultimately included the shutting down of mobile phone networks, internet services and landline connectivity, as well as imposing restrictions on movement and public assembly. The shutting 5 down of the internet and movement restrictions limited the ability of journalists to travel and publish. Journalist thus challenged the restrictions as violations of Article 19 of the Constitution of India. It was in that context that the Supreme Court reviewed three of the petitions challenging the legality of the shutdown of the internet and travel 10 restrictions. Five questions were framed by Supreme Court of India for its determination but only two are relevant to this matter for purposes of establishing some principles from another jurisdiction in comparison to what has been established by the Constitutional and Supreme Courts 15 in Uganda, but within the context of the use of “other media” referred to in Article 29 (1) of the Constitution of Uganda. The two questions were as follows: i. Whether freedom of speech and expression and freedom to practice any profession, or carry on any occupation, trade or business over the Internet is part of the fundamental rights 20 protected by Article 19(1) (a) and (g) of the Constitution of India. ii. Whether the Government’s action of prohibiting internet access was valid. Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India provides for the right to 25 freedom of speech and expression but restrictions may be imposed under Article 19 (2) thereof. The right to practice any trade or professions is guaranteed by Article 19 1(g) but also subject to the restrictions that may be imposed under paragraph 2 of Article 19. 16