New Delhi: Microblogging platform X (formerly Twitter) has begun blocking access in India to more than 8,000 accounts, following orders from the central government, amid cross-border tensions and missile attacks since Operation Sindoor.
Elon Musk’s X stated in a social post that failure to comply may result in severe penalties, fines and imprisonment of the Indian employees. However, after posting this, the official account Global Government Affairs was suddenly blocked, and it stated, “@GlobalAffairs has been withheld in IN in response to a legal demand.”
Even though the account has been restored now, the post regarding the order from the government has been deleted.
Statement by X’s Global Government Affairs
In a statement issued late on 8 May via its Global Government Affairs handle, X revealed that the government’s blocking orders include accounts belonging to international news organisations and prominent users of the platform. The company criticised the move as “unnecessary censorship” and expressed concern that it undermines free speech and the accessibility of vital information for Indian users.
“In most cases, the Indian government has not specified which posts violated Indian law, and we have not received justification for the blocking,” the statement read. While X is complying with the orders to maintain access to the platform in India, it said it fundamentally disagrees with the government’s demands.
The company advised affected users to seek legal recourse and shared contact details for multiple legal aid bodies, including the National Legal Services Authority and Supreme Court Legal Services. Affected users may also contact India’s Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY).
Spread of Misinformation
Several false statements, images and videos have been surfacing on social media amid the increased military tensions between India and Pakistan.
Following India’s missile attacks on nine terror facilities in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir early on 7 May, a wave of disinformation and propaganda warfare erupted, which has been causing more worry and chaos among the netizens.
From blocking entry to all airports to missile strike videos and artificially generated posts, many of these claims have since been refuted by witnesses and fact-checkers.
However, considering the sensitivity of the situation, it might be thought important to block the sources of such posts. However, it should be noted that regarding the same “censorship” matter earlier this year, the Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Centre in response to a petition contesting the disabling of social media accounts and posts without giving account holders a chance to be heard.
A bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih sought the Centre’s answer to the petition, which seeks to overturn Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking Access to Information by the Public) Rules, 2009.
Here, it should be clearly mentioned that the Central Government is authorised to limit access to information online under the IT Rules. This ability can be used to restrict social media accounts or content, and the government is allowed to direct any network provider to block public access to information. However, as mentioned, the Supreme Court has been invited to hear the case involving Rule 16.
While Rule 16 allows the blocking of content without notifying the originator, Section 69A allows the authority to direct platforms or service providers to block public access to particular information.
Discussion about this post