Was asked to completely block multiple accounts during farmer’s protests: Twitter to Karnataka High Court

Microblogging platform Twitter told the Karnataka High Court on Monday that it was asked by the Central government to block multiple accounts during the farmer’s protests that ensued in and around the national capital in 2021..Arguing before Justice Krishna S Dixit against ten blocking orders issued by the government between February 2021 and February 2022, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for Twitter, emphasised that Section 69 A of the Information Technology Act does not contemplate wholesale blocking of accounts.“For example, during the farmer’s agitation in Delhi.. they had simply asked to completely block the accounts. When newspapers and TV channels are reporting it, why do you tell me to completely block all these accounts,” Datar said..It was further stated that the law only allows the blocking of a particular tweet, and not an entire account simply because of political criticism unless there is evidence of a repeated offence. “At the heart of 19 (1)(a) is the right to criticise.. freedom of speech includes the right to criticise the government. The Supreme Court has said that you may criticise within the bounds of the law. You are entitled to your opinions.”.Additionally, the senior counsel argued that the government’s requirement for the intermediary to keep such blocking orders confidential was violative of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Shreya Singhal v Union of India.It was also stated that the government was required to serve a notice of blocking to the account holder along with the intermediary. Thus, a stand taken was that the orders under challenge had not followed procedural requirements.“When you pass a blocking order- it affects the intermediary, and the person. Since it prevents the platform from purveying information.”.Towards the end of the hearing, Justice Dixit sought a comparative analysis of how other jurisdictions across the world had dealt with similar issues. "I want to know have matters gone to review committee? What is the legal framework? How have other jurisdictions done this? Like, American law," Justice Dixit said.In order to respond to this query, Senior Advocate Datar asked for time.Therefore, the hearing was adjourned to 17 October, 2022..The ten blocking orders in question, which were issued between February 2021 and February 2022, directed Twitter to block certain information from access to the public, and to suspend several accounts. The blocking orders were handed over to the High Court via sealed covers marked as annexures A to K.In its petition filed before the High Court, Twitter has contended that account-level blocking is a disproportionate measure and violates the rights of users under the Constitution.Out of a total of 1,474 accounts and 175 tweets, Twitter has challenged the blocking of only 39 URLs.The petition states that the orders in question are manifestly arbitrary, and procedurally and substantively not in consonance with Section 69A of the IT Act.Further, they fail to comply with the procedures and safeguards prescribed by the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (Blocking Rules), it has been submitted.Twitter has also argued that the direction to block entire accounts falls afoul of Section 69A of the IT Act..The Central government, on the other hand, has submitted that the directions to block certain twitter accounts were issued in national and public interest and to prevent incidents of lynching and mob violence.The government has emphasised that it is committed to providing an open, safe, trusted and accountable internet to its citizens, and that its powers to block information has a limited scope..[Read our live coverage of today's hearing here].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.