MUMBAI: The
Bombay high court
on Friday reserved for interim orders, two public interest litigation (
PIL
) challenging the validity of the new digital media ethics code and intermediary guidelines under the
Information Technology Rules
, 2021, asking the Centre “How can protection under substantive law be taken away by a delegated legislation?’’
“You are restricting the liberty of thought...(in the Norms of journalistic conduct it says) one has to be humble, if he is not, does he have to be penalized?’’ asked the bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni at a detailed hybrid court hearing.
It raised several more questions to the Centre’s counsel, additional solicitor general Anil Singh who opposed a plea for a stay of the rules.
The rules have incorporated what are mere guidelines under the
Press Council of India
and the Cable TV code and made them mandatory, stepping beyond the rulemaking powers under the IT Act besides breaching the reasonable restrictions permissible under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution, argued senior counsel Darius Khambata for a digital portal.
He said the rules are “manifestly unreasonable’’ and do no good to democracy.
The bench too said during the hearing, “The
Press Council
guidelines are norms of behaviour. How can you put it to such exalted status of mandatory compliance? Let us know if you are restricting it to Article 19(2) (reasonable restrictions on free speech)’’.
Singh said the main grievance of the petitioners is to government oversight but added that the proposed Interdepartmental committee—which can even block public access to content in emergent cases-- under the new
IT Rules
is not yet notified; ministry to constitute it and it is at the final stage of finalization hence no action is likely to take place in any case.
But the
HC
observed, “Fear of rules operating in the manner that rules provide which will clip their wings under Article 19(1) (a) (fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression) is the petitioner's case, it will leave a sword of Damocles hanging on their head.’’
The ASG said, “My first submission at this stage no need or urgency to stay the new IT rules as there is no adverse action initiated against the petitioners and of 1800 digital media publishers, 97 per cent have been complying with the rules.’’
The two PILs, one by Ashish Khetan from a digital portal and another by media person Nikhil Wagle said the new rules intended to control ‘online content’ and would have a chilling effect on speech.
Khambata said urgency for stay is even more now since the chilling effect is already being experienced via self-regulation. He sought a stay on at least rule 9 which calls for adherence to the Code of Ethics by Publishers. Singh, for the Centre, resisted such a plea saying the rule provides primarily for self-regulation and government oversight, the committee for which is not yet set up.
The HC will pass an interim order till the PIL is finally heard on merit. The order will be pronounced on August 14.
Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India. Don't miss daily games like Crossword, Sudoku, and Mini Crossword.Swati Deshpande is Senior editor at The Times of India, Mumbai, w...
Read MoreSwati Deshpande is Senior editor at The Times of India, Mumbai, where she has been covering courts for over a decade. She is passionate about law and works towards enlightening people about their statutory, legal and fundamental rights. She makes it her job to decipher for the public the truth, be it in an intricate civil dispute or in a gruesome criminal case.
Read Less