‘It strikes at the heart of democracy’: Stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra, senior lawyer approach Bombay HC seeking striking down of Sahyog Portal, amended IT Rule

The HC is likely to hear the pleas on March 16.

‘Unconstitutional, unreasonable restriction on freedom of speech’

The petitions filed on February 4 stated that “through the Sahyog Portal, thousands of individual officers of the Central Government and state governments have been unlawfully conferred with the power to peremptorily issue takedown/ blocking orders, without following the procedure mandated under the Information Technology (IT) Act.”

The petitioners claimed that amended Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules and the Sahyog Portal are  “ex facie unconstitutional, as they enable the blocking or takedown of information on internet platforms on wholly vague grounds.”

“Such powers amount to an unconstitutional and unreasonable restriction on the freedom of speech that goes beyond the constitutionally permissible grounds that have been exhaustively enumerated under Article 19(2) of the Constitution,” Kamra said in his plea.

The petitioners added that the amended Rule and the Portal also constitute a violation of their fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(а), 19(1)(g) and Article 14 and they are beyond the purview of Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act), and “must be struck down and declared illegal, unconstitutional and void.”

“Through the Sahyog Portal, the Respondents are able to effect unilateral blocking/takedown of content on the internet, without complying with the mandatory legal requirements, including the issuance of notice to the originator of the content, affording a hearing to the affected party and passing a reasoned speaking order in respect of such takedowns,” the plea stated.

What do please by Kunal Kamra and Haresh Jagtiani say

The pleas, filed on February 4 through Advocate Meenaz Kakalia, also argued amended IT Rule in question and the Sahyog Portal “render all information on the internet vulnerable to arbitrary takedowns, provide for no remedy against such action, and effectively give thousands of government officers at the Central and State level unchecked power over information flow on the internet. It strikes at the heart of democracy, and a citizen’s right to information”.

The pleas sought declarations from the court, including that “orders for blocking information or disabling access to information on the internet can only be issued under Section 69A of the IT Act read with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (Blocking Rules).”

They also sought direction to the authorities to issue a communication to all ministries and department concerned that no order for the takedown or blocking of information on the internet can be issued without compliance with the procedure under Section 69A of IT Act.

Moreover, the pleas sought direction to quash and set aside the Office Memorandum of October 31, 2023, creating the Sahyog Portal, and, pending hearing and final disposal of the plea, sought suspension of the Portal.

An interim relief is also sought to restrain the authorities from acting upon the amendment to Rule 3 (1) (d) and interim direction that no orders be issued by any officer for blocking or taking down of any information without procedure required under Section 69A of IT Act

In September 2024, the Bombay High Court, with a 2:1 majority, through a verdict on a plea by Kamra and others, had struck down the amended IT Rules that allowed the government to establish a Fact Check Unit to identify “fake news” on social media, in view of the deciding opinion delivered by a third judge.