© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The decision on “whether content will cause national security or public order issues or not should not be allowed to be determined by the platforms,’’ the Central government had argued in the counter to a petition filed by Twitter Inc in the Karnataka High Court against a series of orders to block content on the platform that has been issued by the center in the year 2021.
The counter was recently filed in the high court, which is scheduled to continue hearing of the matter this month. Twitter had moved the court earlier this year with a plea to quash 10 orders issued in the year 2021 by the Centre to block as many as 39 accounts or to restrict the orders to specific tweets which violate Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The Centre has argued in its counter that Twitter being a foreign platform cannot seek freedom of speech and other fundamental rights available to Indian citizens for the users of the platform. “It is therefore submitted that the Petitioner not being natural person and not even being an artificial person founded under Indian law cannot claim rights under Article 19 and further cannot claim the vast expanse of rights under Article 14 or Article 21 either for itself or on behalf of its users,’’ the Centre said while asking the HC to dismiss Twitter’s plea.
The government argued that Twitter did not comply with many blocking orders until final notices were issued by it to the company on June 27. “The petitioner Twitter claims to have complied with the directions and has filed the case. But Twitter has unblocked multiple user accounts that were earlier blocked on government directions under Section 69A (AtheistRepublic, sushant_says, SikhPA, cjwerleman, standwkashmir),’’ the Centre stated in its counter arguments.
It added “that it is pertinent to note that out of the 39 accounts that are challenged in this case, one of the accounts is (Account Name @savukku). On 16.03.2021 the Respondent No.1 had issued a blocking direction under Section 69 A against the account @savukku for “national security” related reasons. The petitioner did not comply with this direction till June 2022.”
“Only on the diligent follow up of the Respondent No 2 (designated officer at the Ministry of Electronics and IT – MEITY) and upon the issuance of show cause notice dated 27.06.2022 the petitioner for reasons best known to it suddenly complied with all the blocking directions and then has challenged blocking directions for specific set of 39 URLs,’’ the statement filed by the ministry read.
The Centre had countered Twitter’s arguments that it cannot block users without an order from the government, by citing the example of the blocking of former US President Donald Trump. “This points to the inconsistent implementation of policy practices by the platform across jurisdictions,’’ it stated.
It had argued that the majority of the 69A blocking orders issued by it are related to national security and public order issues. “Examples of such content include anti-India, or seditious or any religious contents that have potential to incite violence and contents that affect communal harmony in the country eg. SFJ or Khalistan related content.’
“These contents are posted by users who are either terrorists or sedition seekers or their sympathizers or foreign adversaries whose intent is to destabilize India and its national security on communal lines. In a way such users are anti-India campaigners,’’ said the ministry it its counter.
The Centre also claimed that the use of bots, AI, and anonymous accounts on Twitter “can create, select, modify and generate new and multiple content that can be more vicious than the original misinformation content thus ensuring viral spread of misinformation’’.
The government argued that its aim is to ensure that “openness, safety, trust and accountability’’ of the internet is protected since a “large number of Indians are using the internet and are dependent on the internet going forward’’.
In the event of Twitter being aggrieved by any government order, it must “first comply’’ with the order and then and seek its review with the center or approach the courts, if a user is aggrieved they can approach the state through the platform or approach a court for relief, the Centre had stated.
“Thus the show cause notice issued by the Respondent(s) is valid. If the petitioner fails to comply with the directions issued by the Government under Section 69A of IT Act, 2000, then the petitioner’s intermediary status is liable to be withdrawn,’’ it said in its reply to the Twitter petition.
