LegalAction – Centre Initiates Process to Block Controversial Social Media Posts
LegalAction – The Central government has informed the Delhi High Court that it has begun formal proceedings to block certain social media posts described as objectionable and sensitive in nature. The move comes shortly after the court expressed serious concern over tweets posted several years ago by journalist Rana Ayyub, which allegedly referenced Hindu deities and figures linked to Hindutva ideology in an inappropriate manner.
Court Observations Prompt Government Response
During a recent hearing, the High Court had taken note of tweets dating back to the period between 2013 and 2017. The court observed that the content raised concerns due to its tone and potential to disturb communal harmony. Following these observations, the Centre clarified that it had acted within the framework of existing laws to address the issue.
Officials stated that a request had been submitted on April 9 to initiate action under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The process aims to evaluate and potentially restrict access to the identified posts through established legal channels.
Action Under IT Laws and Blocking Rules
According to submissions made before the court, the government has invoked procedures outlined under Section 69A of the IT Act. This section empowers authorities to block public access to online content in specific circumstances, including threats to public order or national integrity.
The authorities further informed the court that the request is currently under review by the designated officer, who will take a final decision based on legal guidelines. The process is being conducted in line with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009.
Concerns Over Platform Compliance
A key aspect of the government’s submission focused on the role of the social media platform X, previously known as Twitter. The Centre indicated that the platform may face consequences for not acting promptly on the flagged content.
It was argued that once law enforcement agencies and courts provide what is termed as “actual knowledge” of unlawful material, platforms are required to respond without delay. In this case, authorities believe that such knowledge had already been established through police notices and court directions.
Safe Harbour Protection Under Scrutiny
The government also highlighted the possibility of withdrawing safe harbour protection from the platform. Under Indian law, intermediaries like social media companies are granted limited liability for user-generated content, provided they adhere to due diligence requirements.
However, officials stated that failure to act despite being notified could result in the loss of this protection. This would make the platform more directly accountable for the content hosted on its services.
Ongoing Legal and Administrative Review
The matter remains under consideration, with both legal and administrative processes underway. The court has been informed that appropriate action will be taken once the review is complete and all relevant factors have been examined.
The case underscores the increasing focus on digital accountability and the responsibilities of both content creators and platforms in maintaining lawful online spaces. It also reflects the growing use of existing IT laws to address concerns related to online speech and public sensitivity.
As the proceedings continue, further clarity is expected on how authorities balance freedom of expression with regulatory oversight in the digital domain.