X appeals Karnataka HC order upholding Sahyog portal

Elon Musk-owned microblogging site X Corp (formerly Twitter) on Saturday appealed the Karnataka High Court's earlier order upholding the Sahyog portal, set up by the Centre to streamline content takedown notices.

The petition asked the court to declare the government's new reading of Section 79 and the use of Rule 3(1)(d) ultra vires (beyond legal power or authority), to strike down all takedown notices issued outside the Section 69A process, and to block the functioning of the Sahyog portal on constitutional grounds.

The issue centers on the government's use of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act and Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021, that empowers senior government officers at joint secretary levels and above, and law enforcement personnel at deputy inspector general of police rank and above across states and ministries, to directly order intermediaries to block content.

X alleges that this bypasses the safeguards of Section 69A and its 2009 Blocking Rules.

Central to the issue is the ministry of home affairs' launch of the Sahyog portal in 2024. The portal allows government agencies and local police to issue content-blocking orders to platforms like X.

These orders, issued under the government's Section 79(3)(b) and new versions of Rule 3(1)(d), require prompt removal of any information deemed "unlawful," a term that X said in its petition is vague and open to abuse.

Recent orders include directives from various state police and ministries demanding the takedown of news coverage, political commentary, and critiques of officials, with scant explanation or opportunity for the original content creators to contest, X has said in its petition.

Cases highlighted in official memos include police in Satara, West Bengal, Bihar, and Chennai ordering X to both remove posts and disclose user data for content ranging from allegations against local officials to critical news reporting and political satire.

Government affidavits and office memoranda, however, insisted that the new process is consistent with Section 79(3)(b), arguing that "actual knowledge" of unlawful content, once relayed by any authorised officer, removes safe harbour protection for intermediaries failing to comply. Ministries cited a need for rapid response to public order threats or misinformation.

Source: EconomicTimes
Related Posts: Trump's DOGE, formerly led by Musk, shuts down 8 months before term end Elon Musk and X reach settlement with axed Twitter workers Elon Musk-Owned Tesla Set To Open Second Showroom In Delhi Weeks After Mumbai Musk's X settles former Twitter executives' $128 million severance pay lawsuit Setback to Musk's X Corp Elon Musk's father Errol Musk in India Tron Ares Twitter review Coolie Twitter reviews Goodbye Twitter Your Twitter account could be locked in two weeks