Bengaluru: Social media intermediary ‘X’ is set to appeal against the Karnataka High Court’s order dismissing their plea challenging its mandatory onboarding on the government’s Sahyog portal.
The Global Government Affairs team of X on Monday expressed concern over the High Court’s order and said that the decision infringes the right to freedom of speech and expression, and violates the apex court’s rulings in similar matters.
Sharing a post, the Global Government Affairs team wrote, “X is deeply concerned by the recent order from the Karnataka court in India, which will allow millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders through a secretive online portal called the Sahyog. This new regime has no basis in the law, circumvents Section 69A of the IT Act, violates Supreme Court rulings, and infringes Indian citizens’ constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression.”
Further, ‘X’ argued that the Sahyog portal enables officers to order the removal of content on social media without a judicial review or following due process.
“The Sahyog enables officers to order content removal based solely on allegations of “illegality,” without judicial review or due process for the speakers, and threatens platforms with criminal liability for non-compliance,” the post said.
Calling the order inconsistent with the Bombay High Court’s recent ruling, the Global Government Affairs team wrote, “X respects and complies with Indian law, but this order fails to address the core constitutional issues in our challenge and is inconsistent with the Bombay High Court’s recent ruling that a similar regime was unconstitutional. We respectfully disagree with the view that we have no right to raise these concerns because of our incorporation abroad–X contributes significantly to public discourse in India, and the voice of our users is at the heart of our platform. We will appeal this order to defend free expression.”
On September 24, the bench of Justice Nagaprasanna pronounced a verdict on X’s plea seeking a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) IT Act does not confer power on the Centre to issue information blocking orders.
“Social media must be regulated,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
The court noted that freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).
Stressing that “unregulated speech under the guise of liberty results in lawlessness,” the bench said social media platforms cannot claim an “anarchic freedom” in the Indian digital space.