[IT Rules 2021] Kerala HC Asks Central Govt To Explain Role Of 'Intermediary,' After Google Argues Power To Investigate Complaints Is Limited Without Court Orders
The Kerala High Court has directed the Union Government to explain the amplitude of duties, responsibilities, and powers of the Intermediary under Rule 3(i)(d) and Rule 3(ii)(a) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. A single-judge bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran heard the matter.The petitioner, part of the Marthoma...
The Kerala High Court has directed the Union Government to explain the amplitude of duties, responsibilities, and powers of the Intermediary under Rule 3(i)(d) and Rule 3(ii)(a) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
A single-judge bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran heard the matter.
The petitioner, part of the Marthoma Christian community had moved the court due to being aggrieved by a YouTube video on Marthoma Bishop Rt. Rev. Dr. Euyakim Mar Coorilos, which he alleges created communal disharmony.
The petitioner had lodged an official complaint against the 6th and 7th Respondents (Youtube and Grievance Officer for YouTube, Google LLC – India Liaison Office) under the IT Rules, which had not been resolved.
Sri Santhosh Mathew, the counsel for Google submitted that the Grievance Officer appointed by them has no right to deal with any complaint that isn't supported by a court order or a notification by the government, except in case of nudity, or those matters already enumerated under Rule 2(b).
The court enumerated that Rule 3(i)(b) under the head of 'Due Diligence by The Intermediary' specifies that they shall act on the basis of court orders or government notifications, but Rule 3(ii)(a) obligates the Grievance Officer to consider complaints against violations of the provisions of the 'Rule', though the latter would become “redundant” if the argument Google was accepted.
“If accepted, the phrase 'user or victim may make complaints against violation of the provisions of the Rules' would appear to be virtually superfluous. This Court is not sure if this is the manner in which the provisions have been designed; and am, therefore, of the view that the Government of India should answer this specifically,” it concluded.
The matter is posted for hearing on March 1, 2023.
Case Title: Aneesh K. Thankachan
Case No. 36896/ 2022