The Delhi High Court on Monday slammed Twitter for not acting swiftly enough to block an atheist organization that has repeatedly posted blasphemous content about the Hindu goddess. The court observed that social media websites become more sensitive when there is content about “another religion”. The court asked the company to show the law that states that action against objectionable tweets on individual accounts can be taken only after a court order.
“There is a growing controversy that people about whom you feel sensitive … about content, you will block them, but you are not concerned about the sensitivities of other people of other races, in other regions of the world . We dare to say that if the same is done with respect to other religions, you will be more careful and sensitive.”
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla directed the Center to probe the disputed tweets and other allegedly objectionable posts by users to see whether they were blocked under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act. can be done. The bench also ordered the @atheistrepublic account to disclose its location and other information about itself.
The directions were issued after the court heard a plea seeking removal of allegedly objectionable material about Goddess Kali posted by @atheistrepublic. The bench had asked two questions to Twitter. First- does it have an obligation to track its users and find out if they are posting anything objectionable; Second- Should I block an account in case of repeated complaints or just remove the content every time there is a complaint?
In response, the social media company said it has removed six tweets from the account and an FIR has been lodged by the police in Karnataka. But, questioning Twitter’s contention that it cannot block an account without a court order, the bench asked, “If this is the argument, why have you blocked former US President Trump?”
The court said, “We want you to show us that you can take action against those who shamelessly blaspheme or hurt the sentiments of the people only if there is a court order…,.”
Taking note of the fact that Twitter had earlier blocked the accounts of public figures, the Division Bench directed the website to file its policy on the circumstances in which it takes such action. The court also said that Twitter will have to comply with the guidelines under the IT Rules, 2021.
The Bench said, “Since (Twitter) has not questioned the prima facie view of this Court with regard to the nature and content of the objectionable post of @atheistrepublic, in our view, Twitter should be able to file it on its own without waiting for today’s hearing.” should have been removed. The posts which were indicated by the petitioner as early as December 9, 2021.”
Earlier, petitioner advocate Aditya Singh Deshwal told the court that Twitter was informed twice about the tweet under investigation before the case was registered. He submitted that Twitter should have taken appropriate action under the new IT rules. The petitioner submitted that even the guidelines of the website prohibit hateful content on its platform.
The Center told the bench that orders are issued to block tweets when a user continues to post objectionable content. The government also said that Twitter automatically blocks accounts based on user complaints.
A lawyer representing @atheistrepublic told the court that the new IT rules were challenged before the judiciary and gave an undertaking that such objectionable material would not be posted by the account until the matter was before the court Will. The bench said, “We direct him to give an affidavit to the position of @atheistrepublic, its constitution; its location; Whether it has any business in India and also keep on record the details of its officers/representatives located in India.
The court had first directed Twitter on October 29 to remove the allegedly objectionable content. At that time a division bench headed by the then Chief Justice DN Patel had asked the social media company to give importance to the sentiments of the people and remove the content. The next hearing in the matter will be held on September 6.