The Delhi high court on Thursday pulled up Twitter for its delay in appointing the resident grievance officers, making it clear that the social media company cannot be given eight weeks to meet the terms of the new Information Technology (IT) rules, and said the Union government was free to take action if the company did not comply.
Twitter had sought eight weeks to appoint permanent grievance officers and to set up a liaison office in India, a request the court denied.
“No, no... I am not giving eight weeks,” said justice Rekha Palli, while adding: “I am not going to protect you… You have also not set up a liaison office which was another requirement under the Rules”.
Senior advocate Sajan Poovaya, representing Twitter, told the court that it was not seeking any protection. “The consequence (of non-compliance) is that the protection to intermediaries falls off. I’m not seeking any protection,” he said.
Poovaya said the company was reserving its right to challenge the rules for now, to which the judge said: “You have the right to challenge but till the Rules are there, they’re there for everybody.”
Close to 10 entities – tech companies, news websites, advocacy groups and private individuals – have challenged the new IT rules. While some, such as Facebook-owned WhatsApp, have challenged specific clauses, others, like Carnatic musician TM Krishna, have argued that the rules in entirety violate multiple provisions of the Constitution.
{{/usCountry}}Close to 10 entities – tech companies, news websites, advocacy groups and private individuals – have challenged the new IT rules. While some, such as Facebook-owned WhatsApp, have challenged specific clauses, others, like Carnatic musician TM Krishna, have argued that the rules in entirety violate multiple provisions of the Constitution.
{{/usCountry}}The government has said that the rules are an important tool to protect the rights of Indian users and compel the digital companies to respect Indian rules and regulations.
“While Twitter is striving to comply with the 2021 Rules, Twitter reserves its right to challenge the legality, validity, and vires of the Rules, and Twitter’s submissions regarding compliance are filed without prejudice to its right to challenge the Rules,” a document filed by Twitter in the high court said.
Twitter on Thursday informed the high court that it appointed an interim chief compliance officer (COO) on July 6 as a contingent worker through a third party contractor, who is a resident of India, and it would require eight weeks to replace the position with a permanent employee.
The social media intermediary also said that it is in the process of making an appointment of an Indian resident as its interim resident grievance officer (RGO) and expects to do so on or before July 11.
The company also added that it intends to employ an interim nodal contact officer within two weeks and a regular employee within eight weeks.
On yet another compliance requirement, which mandates big social media companies to publish a compliance report, the company promised to do so by July 11, the government’s deadline.
Twitter’s submission came after the high court on July 6 asked the social media intermediary to give a deadline for appointing the three grievance redressal officers. The court had warned Twitter “will be in trouble” if it doesn’t comply.
It had also pulled up the company for “misleading” the court and giving “wrong impression” on the appointment of a regular grievance officer. The court took exception to not being informed that an earlier appointment of the resident grievance officer was only on interim basis.
Proceedings in the high court started with senior advocate Poovaya telling the court that his client was making all out efforts to comply with the new IT Rules. He said that usage of “interim” would not lessen or minimise the responsibilities on these officers.
The high court, however, said: “Tomorrow you may take benefit of “interim”. This (your stand) is neither in the letter (to the Centre) nor in an affidavit.”
Responding to a query of court, Poovaya said the officers have been appointed in interim because they do not have a permanent address in India and some tax issues might crop up. To this justice Palli said, “Okay, but I am not going to protect you.”
Additional solicitor general (ASG) Chetan Sharma, for the Centre, objected to the reply filed by Twitter and said that the appointments made could not be permitted through a third party.
“This is not diplomatic parlance. We want accountability, full accountability of great servitude. It can’t be left in half-way house via third party…They’ve talked about making appointments through a third party. What is this third party? Where is it coming from? Let’s say I am a pharma or an IT company in the US…No court would give them leeway like this. I have to be in 100% compliance with the Rules,” Sharma argued.
When Poovaya said that the Centre cannot hold them for contempt for the contents of their affidavit, the court observed: “I am not going into that right now, but you are already in contempt. You had said something in the last hearing, now you are going back on it and trying to salvage the situation maybe.”
The court noted that Twitter has not filed an affidavit but has given a short memo signed by the counsel in which they stated to fully comply with the Rules, as long as there is no stay.
It granted two weeks’ time to Twitter to file hard copies of the notarised affidavit of a competent officer, along with the affidavit of the officer already stated to have been appointed and the persons who are being appointed.
Since early 2021, the company has had multiple disputes with the government, beginning with tweets relating to the farm protests that the government sought to be taken down. In recent weeks, former Union minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has publicly spoken against Twitter for its content moderation practices, while cases have been filed against Twitter’s executives over user content.