The IT Act 2000 is what governs today's #DigitalIndia. However, when it comes to 2021's tech realities, this Act is woefully inadequate and needs to be revised ASAP!
When the IT Act 2000 was brought in, only 0.5% of the Indian population (55 lakh) used the internet. The digital landscape consisted mainly of e-commerce websites. Now, with the rapid transformation of #DigitalIndia, we desperately need an update - internetworldstats.com/asia/in.htm
2/n
In Jan 2021, we received reports of plans by the government to update this Act. We followed up and were informed that @GoI_MeitY's discussions with "relevant stakeholders" have already begun. But it's not just the provisions that need an overhaul, it's the complete framework.
3/n
The framework that governs the #ITAct2000 falls short in multiple areas, including:
⚫️ personal data
⚫️ users' right to privacy
⚫️ freedom of speech and expression
⚫️ surveillance of citizens
⚫️ anti-cybercrime defenses
We truly need a 'reboot' to advance our digital rights.
4/n
The #ITAct fails citizens' right to privacy, and lacks meaningful defenses against AI-fueled attacks (remember the 2019 Pegasus attack?). There are no safeguards against data loss or tampering for an "impugned computer resource" (easy to confiscate). 5/n internetfreedom.in/the-need-to-in…
Tweeted a meme? Beware. The #ITAct2000 helps authorities trace the originator, and gives authorities easy access to your personal data. Ambiguous vocabulary ("reasonable cause", "satisfaction of the controller") can heighten state censorship and mass surveillance.
6/n
The costs of data, and data breaches, have been increasing — alongside the average time needed to both detect & contain such a breach. India produces massive amounts of data every day.
We really need strong, proactive measures to ensure data security. 7/n
IFF urges the Parliamentary Standing Committee on IT to add the #ITAct2000 to its upcoming agenda (since its present list of subjects does not include this).
Any upcoming digital frameworks must be constituted within the rule of law and duly safeguard our fundamental rights.
8/n
If you've read this far, become a part of advancing India's digital revolution. Help IFF advocate for your fundamental rights. Become a member today!
Can Facebook India wash its hands off its role in the Delhi Riots? The Supreme Court says NO — it has upheld the summons issued by the Peace and Harmony Committee of Delhi Assembly and has made some pretty important observations.
In the wake of the bloody Delhi Riots, the Delhi Assembly formed the Peace Committee, to try and understand what caused these riots. Before long, it received complaints regarding Facebook's role — soon after, this @WSJ article went viral 👇🏾 wsj.com/articles/faceb…
2/n
This led to the Parliamentary Committee on IT and the PaH Committee separately summoning Mr. Mohan, Facebook India head. Although he appeared before the Parliamentary Committee, he refused to appear before PaH Committee, stating that it did not fall under their legal domain.
3/n
Has your account been blocked, suspended, or taken down... without notice? (Belated) explanations range from "national interest" to "fake news", but there's no real clarity — who takes them and on what basis? What legal options do we have?
The rate at which accounts are being suspended has increased ➡️ From 3600 in 2019, to 9800 in 2020, to almost 6000 within the first six months of 2021, government takedown orders have grown by leaps.
Excessive & arbitrary restrictions on speech dilute our digital rights.
2/n
In March 2021, in response to an RTI application filed by IFF, the Department of Telecommunications informed us that “94 blocking orders were issued by DoT during 2020 & 2021" and 3725 links were blocked/disabled.
Such widespread censorship undermines our democratic values!
3/n
Electronics and IT: Withdrawing the unconstitutional and regressive IT Rules 2021, updating the IT Act 2000 to address the dynamic nature of our digital landscape, increasing transparency around content blocks, and addressing data breaches — these are some vital concerns.
3/n
What's up with the #ITrules? Here's what ➡️ The UoI has asked the SC to transfer before itself 4 cases (pending in High Courts) questioning the constitutional validity of the rules. IFF is providing legal assistance to @LiveLawIndia in one of them. 1/n internetfreedom.in/union-of-india…
Today, submissions were made by the Ld. Solicitor General for a stay of the pending matters before High Courts. The Supreme Court refused such stay, and ordered the petitions to be tagged and listed before the appropriate bench on July 16.
2/n
The Kerala HC had earlier restrained UoI from taking coercive action against @LiveLawIndia, a respondent in today’s hearing. In an integral decision for the power of collaborative and strategic litigation, the Supreme Court didn’t disturb this order. 3/n
Hearing update: Union of India’s transfer petition is listed as item 7 before Justice Khanwilkar and Justice Sanjiv Khanna of the Supreme Court. The petition seeks to transfer 4 cases that have challenged the validity of IT Rules, 2021 before the Supreme Court. (1/n)
One of these cases is @LiveLawIndia’s petition which is pending before the Kerala High Court. IFF has provided legal assistance to @LivelLawIndia. A blog post summarising the proceedings before Kerala High Court is available here - internetfreedom.in/kerala-hc-gran…
(2/n)
We have previously provided a deep dive analysis of IT Rules, 2021 where we have explained how they are unconstitutional, undemocratic and how they will fundamentally change an Indian user's experience on the internet. internetfreedom.in/intermediaries…
(3/n)
Hearing update: CCI had directed an investigation into WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy which WA challenged before a judge of the Delhi High Court. The judge did not stay the decision of CCI. WA’s appeal against that decision is listed as item 2 before a division bench of DHC.(1/n)
Competition Commission of India’s decision directing an investigation into WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy is available here - cci.gov.in/sites/default/…
(2/n)
The decision of the single judge refusing to stay the decision of CCI is available here - drive.google.com/file/d/1SGYJl8…
(3/n)