How the Information Technology Rules, 2021 curb freedom of speech
The Information Technology Rules, 2021 are hardwired against freedom of speech and expression, and for this reason, they need to be reexamined, writes Talha Abdul Rahman.
Talha Rahman
Published on: 17 January 2025, 01:06 pm
IN the digital era, the dissemination of information has become remarkably swift and far-reaching, posing both opportunities and challenges. While the internet has democratised access to information, it has also become a breeding ground for fake news and hate speech.
Governments worldwide are grappling with the need to regulate digital content to protect citizens while safeguarding the fundamental right to freedom of speech. In India, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, aim to address some of these challenges by regulating intermediaries' roles and responsibilities.
Under the IT Rules, intermediaries, such as social media platforms, are mandated to remove or disable access to certain content within 24 hours of receiving actual knowledge through a court Order or notification from appropriate government agencies, as specified under Rule 3(1)(d).
This swift action is crucial in curbing the spread of harmful content. Furthermore, Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act asserts that intermediaries must comply with such government notifications to retain their safe harbour protection from liability. Thus, for the intermediaries to remain protected, they have to do as directed. Therefore, when it comes to freedom of speech and expression, rarely would they step up to protect the freedoms.
The role of intermediaries in content regulation becomes more complex with the involvement of police authorities.
The role of intermediaries in content regulation becomes more complex with the involvement of police authorities. A gazette notification dated December 26, 2024, by the lieutenant governor of Delhi has designated the Delhi police as the authority to issue take-down notices, empowering specific officers within the police force to identify and direct the removal of content deemed to be hate speech.
Given the political use of almost all enforcement agencies in the past decade, the gazette notification seems a wily step. Issued about 10 days before the notification of elections in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, this empowerment of Delhi police appears to conflict with police power and the freedom of speech. There was also an attendant reshuffle in Delhi police.
