X has previously challenged the government’s use of content-blocking powers—particularly the alleged misuse of Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, which, according to X, bypasses the procedural safeguards of Section 69A. In a case before the Karnataka High Court, X argued that blocking orders must follow proper procedures, including the provision of reasons and prior notice.It is also opposed the government’s new Sahyog portal, terming it a ‘censorship portal’, which allows all government agencies –from Union Ministries down to local police stations — to issue blocking orders, using a Central government-issued template.According to a 2022 report from the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), from 2014 to 2020, India issued 27,811 blocking orders, targeting 40,413 pieces of content or accounts. This included 9,849 orders in 2020 alone, affecting over 13,000 items. In 2023, a notable case involved the blocking of accounts linked to the farmers’ protests and pro-Khalistani content.In 2024, reports indicate that India continued issuing blocking orders, including against accounts related to political dissent and sensitive international issues like the Israel-Palestine conflict. A February 2024 post from X’s Global Government Affairs team confirmed compliance with an Indian order to block accounts and posts, though specific numbers were not disclosed.Under Section 69A of the IT Act, the Indian government is empowered to block public access to online content if it is deemed necessary for reasons such as national security, sovereignty, public order, or preventing incitement to cognizable offenses.
Source link
