Micro-blogging platform Twitter on Tuesday challenged a series of “blocking orders” issued by the government on the grounds that they are “procedurally and substantially deficient” and are violative of Section 69A of the Information and Technology Act.
Sources said that Twitter has moved the Karnataka High Court in a writ petition against blocking orders issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) under Section 69A of the IT Act. A last opportunity was granted to the company on July 4 for compliance. Failure to comply with the blocking orders would cause Twitter to lose its safe harbour immunity as available under Section 79(1) of the IT Act. “Blocking Orders” pertain to the blocking of content on the micro-blogging site. Twitter has maintained that these “blocking orders” demonstrate “excessive use” of powers and are disproportionate because, in some cases, entire accounts are asked to be blocked.
“Multiple accounts and content included in the “Blocking Orders” are either over-broad and arbitrary, fail to provide notice to the originators of the content and are disproportionate in several cases. Similarly, several could pertain to political content that is posted by official handles of political parties. Blocking of such information is a violation of the freedom of speech guaranteed to citizen-users of the platform,” sources told BusinessLine.
‘Committed to principles’
Twitter has also mentioned that it was committed to the “principles of openness and transparency” and details of the requests to withhold content have been, and continue to be, published on Lumen (an independent research project studying take down notices along with other legal removal requests and demands concerning online content).
Reacting to the development, Ashwini Vaishnaw, Minister of Communications and IT, said, “Any company in any sector should follow the rules of India and it is the responsibility of all that whatever rule that the country’s Parliament has passed should be followed.”
The Minister of State for Electronics and IT, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, tweeted, saying all platforms have the right to approach courts, but they have an unambiguous obligation to comply with laws.
“In India, all, including foreign Internet intermediaries/platforms, have the right to court judicial review. But equally all intermediary/platforms operating here, have unambiguous obligation to comply with our laws and rules,” Chandrasekhar tweeted.
The petition was filed in the wake of the MeitY’s June 29 notice to Twitter, warning the company of initiating criminal proceedings if it did not comply with the Blocking Orders. The company was asked to comply with all the past orders by July 4. Sources said Twitter complied this week, so as not to lose liability exemptions available as a host of content.
Twitter has also argued in the petition that it was unable to share the actual contents of the writ pertaining to the blocking orders as these are confidential under Rule 16 of the Blocking Rules and are now sub-judice.
“Finally, some of the content in these blocking orders pertains to dated events. To the best of Twitter’s knowledge, it does not appear that there has been a review of these blocking orders as required under the law. It is therefore likely that some of the content at issue could ultimately be deemed irrelevant and continue to be blocked. However, it will be for the courts to ultimately adjudicate on that,” the company has argued in the petition.
According to experts and analysts tracking the developments, Twitter was well within its rights to approach the courts, and only time will tell if other companies also follow suit.
“Twitter was and is well within its rights to approach courts, but to do so seeking blanket orders may not be sustainable. It would have to seek redress specifically for each takedown requests. It amounts to seeking a review of the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the constitutionality of Section 69A IT Act before a High Court, which would not be sustainable – NS Nappinai, Supreme Court Advocate and Founder-Cyber Saathi told BusinessLine.
According to Prateek Waghre of the Internet Freedom Foundation, given the increasing compliance burdens being imposed upon social media companies by the Indian government, it was only a matter of time when a company would take an adversarial position against the government.
“Twitter appears to be the first company to do so. Only time will tell if other companies will follow suit, since it depends from company to company. This litigation is likely to add a layer of uncertainty to the implementation of certain draft amendments to the IT Rules proposed. Such as the independent appellate panel which the government wants to set up,” Waghre added.
With inputs from Ayushi Kar in Mumbai