News Highlights:
- Recently, the Government of India introduced a new amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, or IT Rules.
- It gives the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) unrestricted power to create a “fact check unit” to identify false or misleading online content.
Key Takeaway:
The changes were announced through the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023, which amended the IT Rules, 2021.
Information Technology Rules 2023:
- About:
- The new rules allow a government “fact check unit” to identify false information related to any business of the central government.
- The fact check unit can scrutinise online comments, news reports, and opinions about government officials and ministries and tell online intermediaries to censor them.
- These rules also allow censorship by online social media companies, ISPs, and file hosting companies.
- Constitutionality:
- The IT Rules, 2023, were created under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- According to the Supreme Court’s Shreya Singhal judgment, intermediaries can only take action if they have actual knowledge from a court order or are notified by the appropriate government about unlawful acts.
- The IT Rules, 2023, go beyond the established restrictions and contain no definition of “fake or false or misleading” information.
- The lack of clarity in the rules creates an unconstitutional power for government censorship.
What are the New Regulations?
- Overview:
- The 2021 IT Rules replaced the previous guidelines and sought to regulate intermediaries and digital news media.
- Social media platforms were required to provide technological solutions to identify the first originator of any information, risking privacy.
- The amendments introduced in April 2023 allow the government to decide for itself what information is bogus and exercise wide-ranging censorship powers by compelling intermediaries to take down posts deemed fake or false.
- Threaten freedom of speech and civil liberties:
- The new regulations threaten freedom of speech and civil liberties in India by restricting speech through executive order rather than legislation.
- Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution grants every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression, which can only be limited through reasonable restrictions made by law on the grounds stipulated in Article 19(2).
- Fake news and misinformation are not grounds on which speech can be limited, and the amendments made to the IT Rules do not caveat the restraints they place in any manner.
- The Fact Check Unit has limitless powers to decide what information is false and compel social media intermediaries to act based on these findings, which are open-ended and undefined.
What are the Concerns?
- Definitions are unclear:
- The amendment fails to define fake news and allows the government’s fact-check unit to declare the veracity of any news “in respect of any business” that involves the state.
- The use of undefined words, especially the phrase “any business”, gives the government unchecked power to decide what people can see, hear, and read on the internet.
- Lack of Standard Practice
- A comprehensive parliamentary legislation on fake news, grounded in Article 19(2), would have been a more constitutionally committed campaign against fake news.
- In France, an independent judge is responsible for making declarations to counter the spread of misinformation during elections.
- A lawfully enacted statute would have demanded consideration of less restrictive alternatives to removing misinformation.
- Removable of Information:
- Intermediaries will remove information deemed false by the Fact Check Unit, leaving only the state to determine what is true.
- The new regulation allows the government to decide what information is bogus and exercise censorship by compelling intermediaries to take down posts deemed fake or false.
- Lesser Rights:
- The rights of the press and individuals to question authority and speak truth to power will be diminished, and civil liberties will be curtailed.
- Violates the Supreme Court’s Judgment:
- Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015), Supreme Court held that a law that limits speech could neither be vague nor over-broad.
Way Forward
- Instead of relying solely on censorship, the government and intermediaries can invest in technology solutions to tackle misinformation and fake news.
- For instance, algorithms can be developed to identify and flag false information, and fact-checking websites can be promoted.
- It is essential to create awareness among the public about the dangers of censorship and the importance of free speech.
- The government, intermediaries, and civil society organisations can work together to develop a collaborative approach to tackle the problem of fake news and misinformation.
- This can include setting up a joint task force to identify and remove false information and promoting media literacy among the public.
Pic Courtesy: freepik
Content Source: The Hindu