India Strengthens IT Rules Following Legal Battle with Elon Musk's X: Key Changes to Content Regulation

X Corp previously filed a lawsuit against the government, challenging regulations for flagging online content. (AI generated image)

New Delhi:

Following legal proceedings with Elon Musk's X regarding social media guidelines, the Centre has introduced significant modifications to the Information Technology law aimed at "enhancing transparency, accountability and safeguards".

A notable amendment restricts the authority to issue removal orders for "unlawful information" to senior officials only. Additionally, authorities must now "clearly specify the legal basis and statutory provision" along with the "unlawful act" when issuing such directives.

This development comes one month after the Karnataka High Court dismissed X Corp's petition challenging government officials' authority to issue information blocking orders. The court stated in its ruling, "Social media needs to be regulated, and its regulation is a must, especially in cases involving offenses against women, without which the constitutional right to dignity of citizens is compromised."

On Wednesday evening, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology officially announced amendments to Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

"These amendments strengthen the framework of due diligence obligations of intermediaries under the Information Technology Act, 2000," the ministry declared. According to the official notification, these changes will become effective from November 15.

The ministry indicated that a review "highlighted the need for additional safeguards to ensure senior-level accountability, precise specification of unlawful content, and periodic review of government directions at the highest level".

A key modification specifies that removal notices for unlawful information can now only be issued by "a senior officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary, or equivalent, or, where such rank is not appointed, a Director or an officer equivalent in rank-and, where so authorised, acting through a single corresponding officer in its authorised agency, where such agency is so appointed". The ministry further clarified that for police authorities, "only an officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG), specially authorised, can issue such intimation".

Previously, even police inspectors possessed the authority to issue these directives.

Another significant amendment introduces the requirement for "reasoned intimation with specific details". "The intimation must clearly specify the legal basis and statutory provision, the nature of the unlawful act, and the specific URL/identifier or other electronic location of the information, data or communication link ('content') to be removed."

The ministry also mandated monthly reviews of all these intimations to ensure "that such actions remain necessary, proportionate, and consistent with law".

"The amendments strike a balance between the constitutional rights of citizens and the legitimate regulatory powers of the State, ensuring that enforcement actions are transparent and do not lead to arbitrary restrictions," the ministry stated.

A section titled "Expected Impact" in the ministry's statement notes that clear guidelines regarding "who can issue directions and how, with periodic review, ensures checks and balances".

"By mandating detailed and reasoned intimations, intermediaries will have better guidance to act in compliance with law. Safeguards and Proportionality: The reforms ensure proportionality and uphold the principles of natural justice while reinforcing lawful restrictions under the IT Act, 2000," it further explained.

Following the Karnataka High Court's decision, X expressed being "deeply concerned" by the ruling that "will allow millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders through a secretive online portal called the Sahyog". "This new regime has no basis in the law, circumvents Section 69A of the IT Act, violates Supreme Court rulings, and infringes Indian citizens' constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression. The Sahyog enables officers to order content removal based solely on allegations of 'illegality,' without judicial review or due process for the speakers, and threatens platforms with criminal liability for non-compliance," the company had stated.

The Centre defended its position in court, arguing that unlawful or illegal content could not claim the same level of constitutional protection as legitimate speech.