Relevance: GS-2: Important aspects of governance (e-governance, accountability), IT Rules 2021, Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors, and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Key Phrases: Information Technology Rules 2021 (IT Rules), Social Media Platforms, Grievance redressal, appellate panels, freedom of speech etc.

Why in News?

• The Government’s plan to set up a panel that can overturn content moderation decisions made by social media platforms is problematic in many ways.
• The idea, which has been proposed as an amendment to the controversial IT Rules, 2021, is to constitute one or more appellate committees that will have the final word on any content moderation issue facing a social media platform.

What are government appellate panels?

• The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has proposed the setting up of government-appointed appellate committees that will be empowered to review and possibly reverse content moderation decisions taken by social media companies like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
• According to a draft of proposed amendments to the Information Technology Rules 2021 (IT Rules), the Central Government shall constitute one or more Grievance Appellate Committees, which shall consist of a Chairperson and such other Members, as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.

Which statutory law is concerned with the introduction and implementation of the IT Rules, 2021?

• The government notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021 under section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

 

Overview of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021

• It mandates a grievance redressal system for over the top (OTT) and digital portals in the country. This is necessary for the users of social media to raise their grievance against the misuse of social media.
• Significant social media firms have to appoint a chief compliance officer and have a nodal contact person who can be in touch with law enforcement agencies..
• Social media platforms will also have to name a grievance officer who shall register the grievance within 24 hours and dispose of it in 15 days.
• If there are complaints against the dignity of users, particularly women – about exposed private parts of individuals or nudity or sexual act or impersonation etc – social media platforms will be required to remove that within 24 hours after a complaint is made.
• Publication of a monthly report about the number of complaints received and the status of redressal.
• There will be three levels of regulation for news publishers — self-regulation, a self-regulatory body, headed by a retired judge or an eminent person, and oversight from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, including codes of practices and a grievance committee.

What is ‘significant social media intermediaries’?

• Social media companies with more than 50 lakh registered users will be considered ‘significant social media intermediaries’, as per the new norms.

Grievance redressal:

• Under the IT Rules, 2021 social media companies like Facebook and Twitter are mandated to appoint India-based resident grievance officers as part of their due diligence as 'intermediaries' who enjoy legal immunity from third-party content on their platform.
  • These officers are responsible for overseeing the grievance redressal mechanism of complaints from the people who use their services.
  • This means that if a user has an issue with an account or a piece of content on a social media platform, they can complain about it to the company’s grievance officer who will have to act and dispose of that complaint within 15 days.
• Draft Amendment:
  • In case a user is not satisfied with the content moderation decision taken by a company’s grievance officer, they can appeal that decision before the government appellate committee.
  • The committee will have 30 days to act on a user’s appeal.
  • Currently, the only remedial measure a user has if they feel a content decision by a company is unfair is to approach the courts.
  • The Grievance Appellate Committee is set up to provide an alternative for a user to file an appeal against the decision of the Grievance Officer rather than directly going to the court of law.

Criticism of the proposal:

• No Legislative basis:
  • The proposal, without any legislative basis, seeks to subject content on social media to the direct scrutiny of the Government by permitting users to appeal decisions of social media platforms to a Grievance Appellate Committee constituted by MeitY.
• Additional responsibilities on grievance officers:
  • It suggests that if a user complains about patently false content, infringes copyright, threatens the integrity of India, etc., a grievance officer will have to expeditiously address it within 72 hours.
• Legal troubles and Privacy issues:
  • Last year, WhatsApp filed a lawsuit against a particular provision in the rules which requires encrypted messaging platforms to trace the identity of the originator of a message.
• Excessive government control:
  • This will not only add another layer of complexity to the problematic IT rules that were introduced last year but also another lever of Government control.
• Curbs dissent:
  • This mechanism will help to tighten the Government’s grip on messaging on social media intermediaries thus serving as a tool to curb the dissent.
• Earlier criticism of IT rules:
  • The IT rules were widely criticized as “deeply unsettling” for the kind of leverage that they give to the Government over digital channels, with troubling implications for freedom of expression and right to information.
• Indirect control:
  • Based on complaints from the public, the government will be able to direct social media platforms to remove content based on descriptors like “obscene”, “pornographic”, “libellous”, “and racially or ethnically objectionable.
  • Some of these terms are not defined as criminal acts of expression in the Indian Penal Code or any other law.
  • So, the government will indirectly gain the power to censor material that otherwise they would not be able to in a manner consistent with the law and the Constitution.

Conclusion:

• Government policies and rulemaking are committed to ensuring an open, safe, trusted, and accountable internet for its users.
• As Internet access continues to rapidly expand in India, new issues related to the above commitments also keep emerging.
• What should be clear after all these years is that a government committee is not the right answer for many woes, let alone social media ones. And in this case, it comes with implications for free speech.
• As India is not a surveillance State, there must not be any illegal or unconstitutional check on the right to privacy and freedom of speech and expression which are the fundamental rights of every citizen.
• There must be a balance as the Constitution itself has provided several limitations on one’s right to speech and expression.

Source: The Hindu, Indian Express

Mains Question:

Q. Social media regulation must be democratic and inclusive, ensuring an open, safe, trusted, and accountable Internet for its users. Discuss.