X vs Sahyog: Free-speech curbs must have a valid basis

This legal case will test the validity under the Constitution of takedown orders for online content

- RAHUL MATTHAN

In a petition before the Karnataka high court, X (formerly Twitter) has challenged the legality of India's Sahyog Portal—a central digital repository that tells social media companies which sites they must block access to. This, the company argues, is an attempt to side-step procedures already approved by the Supreme Court under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act).

Few would disagree that some online content (child pornography, trafficking, etc.) is so utterly unacceptable that law enforcement must actively track it down and immediately remove all traces of its existence. At the same time, there is other content that some may want removed for ideological, personal, or other less explicable reasons. This content should not be taken down unless the reasons for doing so align with one of the restrictions on freedom of speech—the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, public order, etc.—that have been set out under Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution.

This is the central tension in India's content-moderation debate. While we must empower law enforcement agencies to take down harmful content, we must ensure they do not misuse this power and stifle our fundamental right to speech and expression.