The Bombay High Court has recently declined to grant a restraining order against the centre enabling it to move forward with the notification of Fact Check Units (FCUs) under the Information Technology (IT) Rules. The decision transpired during a hearing where a plea sought to halt the centre from implementing the rules until the ongoing legal proceedings concluded.
Social Media Platforms are mandated to remove content flagged as misleading
Petitioners include comedian Kunal Kamra, the Editors Guild of India and the Association of Indian Magazines, they primarily contested Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules. According to this rule, Social Media Platforms are mandated to remove content flagged as misleading by government-backed FCUs.
However, the Bombay High Court asserted that no convincing case had been presented to warrant restraining the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) from proceeding with the notification.
Petitioners are raising concerns that the implementation of these rules could lead to disproportionate and unjustified censorship of outline content related to the central government. Moreover, they argued that the FCU Rules lack clarity are overly broad, and harbour arbitrary elements, rendering them inherently discriminatory. Although the Bombay HC has not yet adjudicated the constitutionality of Fact Check Units under the said IT Rules, it is anticipated to render a decision on the matter in due course.
Can Centre proceed with the notification of FCUs
It is pertinent to note that the Centre had previously assured the court that it would refrain from notifying FCUs until the plea before the Bombay High Court was resolved. However, with the recent ruling, the Centre is now free to proceed with the notification of Fact Check Units under the IT Rules.
Also Read | RBI issues new guidelines for the Credit Card customers – NewsStreetAsia
This decision marks a significant juncture in the ongoing legal battle surrounding online content regulation, setting the stage for further deliberations on the balance between freedom of expression and the regulation of misinformation on digital platforms.
