Fact check unit: IT Rules amendments don’t offer protection to parody, satire, says Bombay HC

The amendments to the Information Technology Rules, prima facie, don’t appear to give protection to parody and satire, the Bombay High Court stated on Monday whereas listening to a petition filed by humorist Kunal Kamra. The HC bench additionally stated Kamra’s petition difficult the amendments was maintainable.

On April 6, the Union authorities promulgated sure amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, together with a provision of a reality examine unit to establish faux or false or deceptive on-line content material associated to the federal government.

Kamra, in his petition, claimed the brand new guidelines might doubtlessly result in his content material being arbitrarily blocked or his social media accounts being suspended or deactivated, thus harming him professionally.

He has sought that the court docket declare the amended guidelines as unconstitutional and provides a course to the federal government to restrain from taking motion in opposition to any particular person beneath the foundations.

The Union authorities, in an affidavit filed in court docket, had “reiterated that the role of the fact check unit is restricted to any business of the Central government, which may include information about policies, programmes, notifications, rules, regulations, implementation thereof, etc”.

“The fact check unit may only identify fake or false or misleading information and not any opinion, satire or artistic impression. Therefore, the aim of the government with regard to the introduction of the impugned provision is explicitly clear and suffers from no purported arbitrariness or unreasonableness as alleged by the petitioner (Kamra),” the Centre’s affidavit additional contended.

On Monday, a division bench of Justices GS Patel and Neela Gokhale, whereas listening to the plea, stated, prima facie, the foundations do not appear to give protection to truthful criticism of the federal government like parody and satire. “You are not affecting parody, satire, that is what your affidavit says. That is not what your rules say. There is no protection granted. That we will have to see,” Justice Patel orally remarked.

The Centre had additionally stated the actual fact examine unit has not but been notified by the federal government and, therefore, arguments made within the petition (by Kamra) relating to its functioning would not have any foundation and have been “premature and under mere misconceptions of the petitioner”.

However, the Bench stated the argument that the problem is “premature” can be incorrect.

The court docket will hear the matter additional on April 27.

As per the amendments, intermediaries comparable to social media firms should act in opposition to content material recognized by the actual fact examine unit or threat dropping their “safe harbour” protections beneath Section 79 of the IT Act.

“Safe harbour” protections enable intermediaries to keep away from liabilities for what third events submit on their web sites.

Stay on prime of expertise and startup news that issues. Subscribe to our each day e-newsletter for the most recent and must-read tech news, delivered straight to your inbox.