X Corp. Challenges Content Blocking Orders of Government 

Syllabus: GS2/Polity and Governance

Context

• X Corp, formerly known as Twitter Inc., is challenging the Indian government’s approach to content blocking on its platform, particularly in relation to the Sahyog portal.

About

• At the heart of the issue is the invocation of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which X Corp believes is being used inappropriately to issue content-blocking orders. 
• The Sahyog Portal: It was launched by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2024.
  • The portal acts as a centralized system for government agencies at various levels—ranging from ministries to local police stations—to issue blocking orders more efficiently.
• X Corp has asked the Karnataka High Court to intervene and ensure that content blocking can only occur under Section 69A.
• This legal battle is part of a broader tension between social media platforms and governments worldwide over the regulation of online content and the balance between freedom of expression and national security concerns.

Legal Framework: Section 69A vs. Section 79(3)(b)

• Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000: This section empowers the government to block public access to content on the internet in certain circumstances, such as concerns over national security, sovereignty, public order, or to prevent incitement. 

• It includes safeguards as laid out by the Supreme Court in the Shreya Singhal case (2015). 
  • A reasoned order explaining the necessity of blocking content.
  • The person or entity affected should have a chance to contest the order.
• Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act: This section deals with the liability of intermediaries (such as platforms like X Corp) for third-party content. 
  • It exempts platforms from liability for illegal content unless they fail to act swiftly to remove or disable access to that content when notified by the government. 
  • X Corp argues that this provision should not be used to directly block content, as it is not intended for that purpose. 

Implications & Way Forward

• Rising State Regulation: The case underscores the growing trend of government intervention and regulation over online content in India.
• Digital Rights at Risk: Lack of transparency in content moderation and takedown processes can undermine users’ fundamental digital rights and freedoms.
• Freedom vs. Security Dilemma: Striking a balance between safeguarding national security and ensuring freedom of expression remains a persistent governance challenge.

Source: TH