The report claimed an average of 32 arrests per month under the DSA, with arrest rates increasing in 2021 and during the year. Separate news stories noted even children were facing DSA charges. At least 18 cases were filed against 20 children between ages 13 and 17 in 12 districts of the country. In March Amnesty International reported, “Section 25 (publication of false or offensive information), Section 29 (publication of defamatory information) and Section 31 (offense and punishment for deteriorating law and order) of the DSA were used systematically to target and harass dissenting voices, including those of journalists, activists, and human rights defenders. These actions contravened the country’s commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as its domestic constitutional obligations.” Violence and Harassment: Authorities, including intelligence services and student affiliates of the ruling party, subjected journalists to physical attacks, harassment, and intimidation, especially when tied to the DSA, which human rights activists viewed as a government and ruling party tool to intimidate journalists. The Editors’ Council, an association of newspaper editors, stated the DSA stifled investigative journalism, and members published editorials stating so publicly. Individuals faced the threat of being arrested, held in pretrial detention, subjected to expensive criminal trials, fines, and imprisonment, as well as the social stigma associated with having a criminal record. Of 20 clauses of the law relating to crime and punishment, 14 are nonbailable, five are bailable, and one is negotiable, according to the Editor’s Council. Minority rights organizations criticized the arbitrary detention under the DSA of minority community members on the false pretext of blasphemy. They claimed the government arrested members of the minority community after anti-Hindu violence in October 2021, to ensure news of brutalities committed against minorities was not posted on social media. Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: Both print and online independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views; however, media outlets that criticized the government were pressured by the government. Independent media could not operate freely or without restrictions. Page 17