Sign In
Learn bits
Polity & Governance
Mahesh

10/02/24 06:39 AM IST

‘Censorship’ or ‘right to authentic information'

In News
  • A division bench of the Bombay High Court recently delivered a split verdict on petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023 (IT Rules).
Amended IT Rules
  • Rule 3(1)(b)(v) specifically requires intermediaries to make “reasonable efforts” to ensure that its users do not upload or transmit any content that has been identified as “fake or false or misleading” by the Centre’s FCU.
  • Such flagged content would have to be taken down if the intermediaries want to retain their “safe harbour” protection — a form of legal immunity against any third-party content hosted by them.
  • The amendment, however, does not define the term ‘any business of the Central government.’
  • The FCU is likely to have four members— a representative from the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, one from the Union Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, a media expert, and a legal expert.
Concerns
  • The petitioners contended that the amendment enables the government to be the “prosecutor, the judge, and in that loose sense, the executioner” of what constitutes the ‘truth’ online, thereby violating the cardinal principles of natural justice.
  • They also pointed out that the “over-broad and vague” nature of the rules created a ‘chilling effect” on the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
  • It was also highlighted that the rules do not afford the affected user any opportunity to be heard before a decision as to the “fake, false, or misleading” nature of the content is rendered.
Arguments in favor
  • The FCU will only notify intermediaries that the content they are hosting is fake, false, or misleading, following which they can choose to either take it down or leave it up with a disclaimer.
  • Highlighting that the FCU’s notice is merely advisory, the government argued that in case users are aggrieved by the intermediary’s decision, they can always approach a court of law, which would be the final arbiter on the matter.
Source- The Hindu

More Related Current Affairs View All

15 Nov

Government issues guidelines to curb misleading ads by coaching centres

'The central Government issued new guidelines aimed at curbing misleading advertisements by coaching institutes, specifically prohibiting false promises such as "100 per cent selec

Read More

15 Nov

Janjatiya Gaurav Divas

'Every year on November 15th, Janjatiya Gaurav Divas is celebrated to honor the contributions of these communities, especially in India’s freedom struggle.' 5th November

Read More

15 Nov

Supreme Court’s order on mandatory accessibility standards

'A bench of the Supreme Court last week ordered the Union government to frame mandatory rules for ensuring the accessibility of public places and services to persons with disabilit

Read More

India’s First Ai-Driven Magazine Generator

Generate Your Custom Current Affairs Magazine using our AI in just 3 steps