NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Elon Musk's company, X, formerly known as Twitter, has filed a significant lawsuit against the Indian government, claiming unlawful expansion of censorship powers that compromise legal protections for online content removal.
The lawsuit, submitted on March 5, 2025, in the Karnataka High Court, asserts that India’s Ministry of Information Technology (IT) is enabling an unauthorized method for blocking content through a government-operated website initiated by the Ministry of Home Affairs last year. This portal is alleged to operate outside the established legal frameworks that safeguard content from censorship.
X's legal documents, although not public, have been reported widely, highlighting the company's concerns that the new mechanism allows numerous officials to issue content-blocking orders without following the necessary legal requirements.
The core of X's argument centers on section 79(3)(b) of India’s IT Act, which allows intermediaries to lose their legal immunity if they fail to remove flagged unlawful content. X contends that the government misuses this section to sidestep strict rules that should govern such actions as dictated by Section 69A of the IT Act. The latter stipulates that content removal must be justifiable on specific grounds such as threats to sovereignty or public order and requires judicial oversight.
X's court papers state this practice forms an "impermissible parallel mechanism" that enables unchecked censorship in India. The company argues that the Sahyog Portal does not adhere to the necessary stringent legal safeguards that Section 69A mandates. In this context, the lawsuit claims the government is effectively nullifying directives established by the Supreme Court in the landmark 2015 case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, which highlighted required procedural protections for content blocking.
The case has history; X previously faced the Indian government over similar censorship disputes during a farmers' protest in 2021, where it resisted orders to block specific tweets. That stand-off prompted public scrutiny but ultimately saw X comply with government directives, continuing to escalate its legal challenges.
The latest allegations mark a significant climax in the ongoing conflict between Indian authorities and X regarding free speech and content regulation on digital platforms. As further hearings are set for March 27, attention will be focused on how this will affect existing frameworks governing online content.
Commenting on the matter, Indian journalist Chandra R. Srikanth noted the burgeoning discord between Musk’s company and the Indian government, indicating a shift towards a more contentious relationship which could impact Musk’s investments in other ventures in India, including Starlink and Tesla.
Responses from users on social media reflect a mixture of concerns and forecasts, suggesting the collisions of power between a global tech entity and a sovereign government. One user remarked on this conflict asserting Musk is unlikely to back down, while others expressed hope for a fact-checking mechanism to navigate the emerging complexities.
The legal dispute underscores broader discussions about governmental control over digital platforms, user freedoms, and the implications of censorship in the digital age. With X challenging the integrity of the Sahyog Portal and its implementation, this case might redefine the contours of online expression in India.
As the legal battle unfolds, it is expected to have lasting ramifications, not just for Musk's ventures, but for the future of digital freedom in India.
