Indian IT Ministry seeks veto on social media suspensions

Update (June 7): The IT Ministry has reposted a proposed amendment to the IT Rules that would allow it to veto suspensions on social media. On Tuesday, the government put out a revised document on its website with a press note that said that it was “putting the interests of Digital Indians first”.

Update (4:18 pm, June 2): The Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology walked back a proposed amendment to the IT Rules that would have given it a veto on suspensions on social media platforms. While the link to the document still works as of this writing, the link to it on the website appears to have been removed. A government source told Entrackr that the proposal was being withdrawn to fix some “editorial mistakes” and that it may be back up within the week.

Original post follows 

The government on Wednesday published draft rules that would allow it to supersede the decision of social media websites like Twitter and Facebook on issues like suspension of accounts.

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on Wednesday issued a draft amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Liability and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, better known as the IT Rules. A “Grievance Appellate Committee” would be set up by the government to adjudicate on appeals against suspensions from users.

“Every order passed by the Grievance Appellate Committee [on appeals] shall be complied with by the concerned Intermediary,” the proposed amendment says. The focus on suspensions is interesting after the huge debates over the suspension of then US president Donald Trump by multiple social platforms in 2020. India, with a ranking of 150 out of 180 countries in the Press Freedom Index, is a prime case of a market where these platforms are being allowed to operate, even as government regulations creep up constantly to keep them ‘in line’.

LIke the issue of VPN’s being ordered to store user data, which was completely against the very basis of a good VPN, it remains to be seen if the social media platforms can resist this order, if enforced. For the record, some of the key VPN firms have preferred to move their servers out of India than comply.

Previously, suspension appeals to social media companies under the IT Rules could only be appealed to the courts, where at least one company, Twitter, has argued that restoring suspended users is a matter between the company and users, and when users violate its terms and conditions, they have a contractual obligation to suspend them.

The government signaled its opposition to “deplatforming” users in May. “Deplatforming is a big deal - [It is] a violation of fundamental rights of users [and] must [have] force of law behind it for any platform to exercise [and] must never ever be done arbitrarily,” MeitY Minister of State Rajeev Chandrasekhar said on Twitter on May 11. This proposed amendment — which includes an addition that social media companies must respect users’ constitutional rights — appears to be codifying Chandrasekhar’s position.

But government capture of this appeal process may have a mixed reception even among the deplatformed. Supreme Court Advocate Sanjay Hegde, who has been fighting in the Delhi High Court to get his suspension on Twitter reversed, told Entrackr, “My question is who is the authority. Is the authority independent of the government? If the appellate authority is independent of the government, then that would be something worth looking at. But if this authority is part of the Ministry, then it renders all powers to the government. I would not think that is a very good solution. It may be better than the present position, but it is not the correct solution.”

At the beginning of Hegde’s case, the IT Ministry distanced itself from the issue, saying that it was a matter between him and Twitter. But as it progressed, the IT Ministry warmed up to his position, and argued in court that it was constitutionally unacceptable to deplatform users without accountability.

But government capture of this appeal process may have a mixed reception even among the deplatformed. Supreme Court Advocate Sanjay Hegde, who has been fighting in the Delhi High Court to get his suspension on Twitter reversed, told Entrackr, “My question is who is the authority. Is the authority independent of the government? If the appellate authority is independent of the government, then that would be something worth looking at. But if this authority is part of the Ministry, then it renders all powers to the government. I would not think that is a very good solution. It may be better than the present position, but it is not the correct solution.”

At the beginning of Hegde’s case, the IT Ministry distanced itself from the issue, saying that it was a matter between him and Twitter. But as it progressed, the IT Ministry warmed up to his position, and argued in court that it was constitutionally unacceptable to deplatform users without accountability.

The government has given stakeholders until June 22nd to provide their views on the matter, and said that their responses may be published publicly.

This amendment echoes a recent attempt by the US state of Texas to limit deplatforming of users by social media platforms. That attempt was put on hold by the US Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling, after social media companies argued that requiring social media firms to keep users on their platforms this way was a violation of ‘their’ freedom of speech rights.