Social media company Twitter moved the Karnataka high court on Tuesday against the Union government’s orders for it to take down posts and accounts, people aware of the matter said, a legal challenge that has accused the Centre of abuse of power.
The petition, first reported by Reuters on Tuesday, is the latest escalation of a fight between the government and the social media company that first broke out early in 2021, when the Centre sought a number of posts in connection with the then ongoing farmers’ agitation to be pulled down. While Twitter mostly complied, it did not act on several accounts and posts, especially those of politicians and mediapersons.
In June 2022, the ministry of electronics and technology (Meity) “served a letter setting out serious consequences of non-compliance, including, but not limited to, criminal proceedings against Twitter’s chief compliance officer, and granted last opportunity to comply…” the person said, asking not to be named.
Also read: Work on to hold social media accountable, says IT minister amid Twitter's HC move
The government letter also warned that Twitter stood to lose its so-called safe harbour status, which gives it immunity for the content posted by users on its platform, if it did not comply. “Due to the seriousness of these threats, Twitter has chosen to challenge the several blocking orders issued by Meity through a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka,” this person added.
{{/usCountry}}The government letter also warned that Twitter stood to lose its so-called safe harbour status, which gives it immunity for the content posted by users on its platform, if it did not comply. “Due to the seriousness of these threats, Twitter has chosen to challenge the several blocking orders issued by Meity through a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka,” this person added.
{{/usCountry}}Reacting to the report about Twitter’s writ petition, Union minister Ashwini Vaishnaw told news agency ANI: “”Social media accountability has become a valid question globally. It’s important to hold it accountable, which will first start with self regulation, then industry regulation, followed by government regulation...”
In its grounds to challenge the orders, Twitter cited right to free speech and the lack of “any apparent proximate relationship to the grounds under Section 69A [of the Information Technology Act]”.
“Multiple accounts and content included in the blocking orders are either overbroad and arbitrary, fail to provide notice to the originators of the content, and are disproportionate in several cases,” the company said in its petition. “Similarly, several could pertain to political content that is posted by official handles of political parties,” the company contended.
Reuters reported that Twitter did not give details of the particular blocking orders that it has cited.
Also read: Your luggage delivered, tweets Jyotiraditya Scindia after student shares IndiGo ordeal
Twitter is the second major tech company to have sued the Indian government. Meta-owned WhatsApp challenged the government IT Rules, 2021, which was released in the aftermath of the dispute with Twitter last year, for being unconstitutional. The rules sought to give the government even broader powers over the online content, and has since been stayed by multiple high courts.
NS Nappinai, Supreme Court lawyer and founder of Cybersaathi, said 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 specific to each takedown request. Else it amounts to seeking a review of the Supreme Court’s decision upholding constitutionality of Section 69A IT Act before a High Court which would not be sustainable,” she said.
Internet Freedom Foundation trustee Apar Gupta said, “The petition by Twitter to challenge the Government’s directions to block user accounts and tweets is a significant development that will impact free expression for Indian social media users. The directions issued under the IT Act to block websites, user accounts or social media posts are through secret orders not disclosed to the public, or often even to the actual impacted user. Beyond a lack of transparency, recent internet urls within two orders by the Government was disclosed by Twitter to include tweets by Freedom House that pointed to a drop in media freedoms. This example illustrates that the orders themselves may go beyond the permissible grounds of blocking and the response to block rather than engage departs from democratic commitments.”
Also read: Elon Musk is 'feeling bored' and back on Twitter - with a photo of the Pope
The government draws its powers to direct social media companies on content decisions from Section 69 of the IT Act. This provision gives the government to act against posts and accounts on grounds that that pose a threat to public order or the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states among others. The order to block a post or account is passed by a designated officer appointed by the central government who chairs an inter-ministerial committee comprising officials from the ministries of Law and Justice, Home Affairs, Information and Broadcasting and the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In).