The Supreme Court of India has taken up a plea challenging the process of blocking social media content without prior notification to the content creator. On Monday, Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih called for the Centre’s response to the petition, which seeks to quash Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009.
The plea, presented by senior advocate Indira Jaising on behalf of the petitioner, Software Freedom Law Center, argues that the rules violate the principles of natural justice by not mandating a notice to the originator of the content. Instead, notifications are currently only sent to the platforms hosting the content. Jaising emphasized that while the government has the authority to remove content, it should also provide a notice to the individuals who posted the information online.
The petition contends that Rule 8 of the 2009 Rules grants authorities unguided discretion to decide whether to notify the content originator, thus leading to potential rights violations under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution. These articles ensure the protection of freedom of speech and expression and the right to life and personal liberty, respectively.
During the proceedings, Justice Gavai tentatively acknowledged that if a content originator is identifiable, they should be notified. However, he noted that the court’s familiarity with social media norms is not comprehensive, candidly admitting his own absence from such platforms.
The petition cited numerous instances where websites, apps, and social media accounts were blocked without notification or an opportunity for the content creators to respond or be heard. It argued that the confidentiality required in blocking requests under the current rules adds another layer of opacity, likening it to dealing with the ‘inscrutable face of a sphinx.’
The plea urgently calls for the Supreme Court’s intervention to safeguard the fundamental rights to speech and expression, which are crucial for both individual liberty and the democratic framework of society. It further requests that both the intermediaries and the content creators be issued notices when blocking actions are initiated, as per Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which outlines the government’s power to block public access to information through computer resources.
