Elon Musk’s X cannot push illegal content material citing ‘protected harbour’ clause: Indian govt to court docket

On Thursday, the Centre advised the
Karnataka Excessive Court docket that permitting the proliferation of illegal content material on social media within the identify of “free speech” endangers the nation’s democracy. In response to The Occasions of India, the Centre accused
Elon Musk’s X, previously often known as Twitter, of trying to flee accountability.

The authorities famous that Musk’s firm is doing so by sheltering itself below the IT Act’s ‘protected harbour’ safety, The Occasions of India reported. Within the letter to the Karnataka Excessive Court docket, Solicitor Normal Tushar Mehta mentioned the constitutional safety to freedom of speech below Article 19(1)(a) should not be misunderstood as absolute safety even of illegal content material.

“Constitutional jurisprudence clearly differentiates between protected speech that contributes meaningfully to democratic discourse and illegal speech that undermines societal stability and particular person rights,” Mehta mentioned within the letter, based on a report by the TOI.

‘Protected Harbour isn’t a proper however a privilege’

The solicitor common famous that the ‘Protected Harbour’ provision within the IT Act is “not an absolute proper” however a “privilege contingent upon strict adherence to statutory duties.” The assertion from the Centre got here after X moved the Excessive Court docket in search of to restrain authorities departments from taking coercive motion towards the social media platform.

“Illegal and unjustified orders hurt the X platform and its means to function. The issuance of knowledge blocking orders with out following due strategy of regulation, and in violation of the IT Act and the Structure, violates X’s proper to equality below Article 14 and detrimentally impacts its enterprise,” the Centre mentioned in a written submission to the Karnataka Excessive Court docket.

“Proliferation of what could be termed as illegal content material on social media platforms poses an unprecedented menace to public discourse, democracy and societal stability.” “Social media intermediaries possess an unparalleled means to amplify data instantaneously, with out conventional boundaries like language or geographical limitations, and thus carry important obligations,” Mehta wrote within the submission.

Why it issues

The federal government’s stance on the matter can have implications for all social media platforms working in India. This additionally goes hand in hand with the calls to take away Part 230 of the US’s Communications Decency Act, from which social media giants derive their immunity.

Within the submission, the federal government argued that X tried to current ‘protected harbour’ as an absolute proper, devoid of any corresponding duties. “Such a stand essentially misconstrues the very foundation of this authorized safety. ‘Protected harbour’ isn’t a constitutional assure however a statutory privilege, particularly designed to foster accountable conduct,” the submission mentioned.

The Centre mentioned that social media platforms use ‘amplification’ mechanisms to push visibility of a selected kind of view. “The algorithms utilized by intermediaries actively curate and enhance content material, shaping public opinion and considerably influencing social concord or dysfunction. This lively function calls for heightened accountability, necessitating strong regulation particularly tailor-made for social media, distinct from conventional media,” the submission reads.

With inputs from companies.