“India’s new IT Rules amendment effectively empowers the government to be the judge and the jury on online content pertaining to itself. Fake, false and misleading are subjective terms with no legal definition. They can be used to arbitrarily demand removal of online content such as editorials, investigative journalism, satire, and more,” Namrata Maheshwari, Asia Pacific Policy Counsel at Access Now said in the statement issued on Tuesday.
On April 6 this year, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology notified an amendment to the IT Rules under which it proposed setting up a state-appointed body to fact-check all government-related content online deemed as misinformation or disinformation.
In their letter, the 16 agencies said that the proposal would “grant the government arbitrary, overbroad, and unchecked censorship powers that threaten the rights to freedom of expression and opinion enshrined in the Indian Constitution and under international human rights law”.
“The rules severely threaten press freedoms and the ability of journalists, writers, activists, civil society organisations, human rights defenders, artists, politicians, and others, to speak freely online,” the letter said.
As per the proposal, the government fact-check body will be responsible only for information related to central government schemes and will send relevant notices informing intermediaries of content that has been deemed misinformation or disinformation by it.
Discover the stories of your interest
Intermediaries that do not agree with the decisions made by the state-run fact-check unit would be free to not take down the content in question. They would, however, be deprived of the protections granted to them under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, which grants internet intermediaries immunity from content posted by users and other third parties.
“India’s new IT Rules amendment effectively empowers the government to be the judge and the jury on online content pertaining to itself. Fake, false and misleading are subjective terms with no legal definition. They can be used to arbitrarily demand removal of online content such as editorials, investigative journalism, satire, and more,” Namrata Maheshwari, Asia Pacific Policy Counsel at Access Now said in the statement issued on Tuesday.
On April 6 this year, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology notified an amendment to the IT Rules under which it proposed setting up a state-appointed body to fact-check all government-related content online deemed as misinformation or disinformation.
In their letter, the 16 agencies said that the proposal would “grant the government arbitrary, overbroad, and unchecked censorship powers that threaten the rights to freedom of expression and opinion enshrined in the Indian Constitution and under international human rights law”.
“The rules severely threaten press freedoms and the ability of journalists, writers, activists, civil society organisations, human rights defenders, artists, politicians, and others, to speak freely online,” the letter said.
As per the proposal, the government fact-check body will be responsible only for information related to central government schemes and will send relevant notices informing intermediaries of content that has been deemed misinformation or disinformation by it.
Discover the stories of your interest
Intermediaries that do not agree with the decisions made by the state-run fact-check unit would be free to not take down the content in question. They would, however, be deprived of the protections granted to them under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, which grants internet intermediaries immunity from content posted by users and other third parties.