Editor's Pick | Bombay HC strikes down Centre’s amended IT rules

The Bombay High Court on Friday struck down the amended Information Technology Rules, 2023, which empowered the Centre to set up a fact check unit (FCU) to identify fake, false and misleading information about the government and its establishments on social media. The “tie-breaker” judge, Justice Atul Sharachchandra Chandurkar, delivered the verdict on Friday after a Division Bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale delivered a split verdict on January 31, 2024. Justice Chandurkar said the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023, violated Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom and right to profession) of the Constitution”. The expression “fake, false and misleading” in the Rules was “vague and hence wrong” in the absence of any definition, he added. “The impugned Rule also results in a chilling effect qua an intermediary,” the judge said. In April 2023, the Ministry of Electronics and IT (MEiTY) established the FCU by amending the IT Rules, 2021. Subsequently, political satirist and stand-up artist Kunal Kamra, the Editors Guild of India, the News Broadcasters and Digital Association and the Association of India Magazines (AIM) through the Internet Freedom Foundation filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the IT Amendment Rules, 2023, calling them “arbitrary, violating fundamental rights of speech and expression and vague”. On January 31, Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale pronounced a split verdict. While Justice Patel ruled in favour of the petitioners, Justice Gokhale had disagreed and upheld the amendment. The case was then placed before Justice Chandurkar, a third judge in February 2024, by the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. In March 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the government notification establishing the FCU. Defending the FCU, in July, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, said the unit would prevent people from spreading false information. “This approach represents the least restrictive method to counteract fake, false, and misleading information. Private companies and individuals also maintain fact-checking units and the government is similarly justified in providing accurate information to the public,” he said. Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Navroz Seervai in February 2024, flagged numerous points that violated human rights under the amended rules. “There is already the Press Information Bureau, a government organisation that flags information about the government’s business, which it believes to be fake, false or misleading. Not one case has been pointed out by the Union since the split judgment, that the absence of the FCU has caused any prejudice to it. This makes out a strong case for interim relief.” As per the new IT rules, the government can ask social media platforms such as Facebook, X, Instagram, Youtube to remove any content/ news related to the “business of the Central government” that was identified as “fake, false, or misleading” with the help of the FCU. An organisation appointed by the government will be the arbiter, and if intermediaries do not comply with the organisation’s decision, they may lose their safe harbour status under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000. The ruling has been welcomed by the Editors Guild of India and digital rights groups. “Governments should never be in the fact-checking business as that’s the job of independent media and civil society,” Mishi Choudhary, founder of the Delhi-based Software Freedom Law Center said. “We are grateful to the Association of Indian Magazines for giving us this opportunity to fight for our right to freedom of speech and expression,” the Internet Freedom Foundation said. Mr. Kamra, one of the petitioners, posted on X: “They may keep trying, but we the people of India will always uphold the Constitution to humble those who are drunk on power.” In an editorial, The Hindu had called the idea to set up a government fact checking unit “retrograde”, saying it was liable to be misused against critics. The Hindu’s Editorial Staunch the breach: On India, Pakistan and the Indus Waters Treaty Pivot to watch: On the U.S. Fed’s rate reduction, its impact The Hindu’ s Daily Quiz Who headed the panel which recommended simultaneous polls in India? Pratibha Patil Ram Nath Kovind Jeevan Reddy P. Sathasivam To know the answer and to play the full quiz, click here. [logo] Editor's Pick 21 September 2024 [The Hindu logo] [EP Logo] Editor's Pick 21 September 2024 In the Editor's Pick newsletter, The Hindu explains why a story was important enough to be carried on the front page of today's edition of our newspaper. [View in browser]( [More newsletters]( Bombay HC strikes down Centre’s amended IT rules The Bombay High Court on Friday [struck down]( the amended Information Technology Rules, 2023, which empowered the Centre to set up a fact check unit (FCU) to identify fake, false and misleading information about the government and its establishments on social media. The “tie-breaker” judge, Justice Atul Sharachchandra Chandurkar, delivered the verdict on Friday after a Division Bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale delivered a split verdict on January 31, 2024. Justice Chandurkar said the [Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules]( 2023, violated Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom and right to profession) of the Constitution”. The expression “fake, false and misleading” in the Rules was “vague and hence wrong” in the absence of any definition, he added. “The impugned Rule also results in a chilling effect qua an intermediary,” the judge said. In April 2023, the Ministry of Electronics and IT (MEiTY) established the FCU by [amending the IT Rules]( 2021. Subsequently, political satirist and stand-up artist [Kunal Kamra]( the Editors Guild of India, the News Broadcasters and Digital Association and the Association of India Magazines (AIM) through the Internet Freedom Foundation filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the IT Amendment Rules, 2023, calling them “arbitrary, violating fundamental rights of speech and expression and vague”.  On January 31, Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale [pronounced a split verdict](. While Justice Patel ruled in favour of the petitioners, Justice Gokhale had disagreed and upheld the amendment. The case was then placed before Justice Chandurkar, a third judge in February 2024, by the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. In March 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the [government notification]( establishing the FCU. Defending the FCU, in July, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, said the unit would prevent people from spreading false information. “This approach represents the least restrictive method to counteract fake, false, and misleading information. Private companies and individuals also maintain fact-checking units and the government is similarly justified in providing accurate information to the public,” [he said]( Representing the petitioners, senior advocate Navroz Seervai in February 2024, flagged numerous points that violated human rights under the amended rules. “There is already the Press Information Bureau, a government organisation that flags information about the government’s business, which it believes to be fake, false or misleading. Not one case has been pointed out by the Union since the split judgment, that the absence of the FCU has caused any prejudice to it. This makes out a strong case for interim relief.” As per the new IT rules, the government can ask social media platforms such as Facebook, X, Instagram, Youtube to remove any content/ news related to the “business of the Central government” that was identified as “fake, false, or misleading” with the help of the FCU. An organisation appointed by the government will be the arbiter, and if intermediaries do not comply with the organisation’s decision, they may lose their safe harbour status under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000. The ruling has been welcomed by the Editors Guild of India and digital rights groups. “Governments should never be in the fact-checking business as that’s the job of independent media and civil society,” Mishi Choudhary, founder of the Delhi-based Software Freedom Law Center said. “We are grateful to the Association of Indian Magazines for giving us this opportunity to fight for our right to freedom of speech and expression,” the Internet Freedom Foundation said. Mr. Kamra, one of the petitioners, posted on X: “They may keep trying, but we the people of India will always uphold the Constitution to humble those who are drunk on power.” [In an editorial]( The Hindu had called the idea to set up a government fact checking unit “retrograde”, saying it was liable to be misused against critics. The Hindu’s Editorial [Arrow][Staunch the breach: On India, Pakistan and the Indus Waters Treaty]( [Arrow][Pivot to watch: On the U.S. Fed’s rate reduction, its impact]( The Hindu’ s Daily Quiz Who headed the panel which recommended simultaneous polls in India? - Pratibha Patil - Ram Nath Kovind - Jeevan Reddy - P. Sathasivam To know the answer and to play the full quiz,[ click here.]( Today’s Best Reads [[Tirupati laddu row: VHP demands control of Hindu temples to be given to society to safeguard sentiments of believers] Tirupati laddu row: VHP demands control of Hindu temples to be given to society to safeguard sentiments of believers]( [[Top police officers look at ‘non-Western’ approach to handle tribal issues] Top police officers look at ‘non-Western’ approach to handle tribal issues]( [[Blockchain, smart materials, among innovative projects mooted in PM solar scheme] Blockchain, smart materials, among innovative projects mooted in PM solar scheme]( [[NIA searches four Punjab locations in Pannun case] NIA searches four Punjab locations in Pannun case]( Copyright© 2024, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( Manage your newsletter subscription preferences [here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](