The Twitter account of Prasar Bharati CEO, Shashi Shekhar Vempati (user handle @sashidigital) was withheld by Twitter in India. The profile had its display picture and content hidden with the message from the microblogging platform that read, ¡°Your account has been withheld in India in response to a legal demand.¡±
This was highlighted by Prasar Bharti¡¯s Twitter handle, asking the Twitter reason for this random withholding. It asked stating, "Dear @twitter @TwitterIndia could you explain the grounds for withholding CEO Prasar Bharati¡¯s Twitter handle @shashidigital in India?"
Surprisingly, it wasn¡¯t just Shashi Shekhar Vempati who lost access to the account, there were quite a few individuals, including activist Hansraj Meena, The Caravan Magazine, the Kisan Ekta Morcha, AAP MLA Jarnail Singh, CPI (M) leader Mohammed Salim and others.?
While investigating a reason for this, I stumbled upon a tweet by Lauren Frayer, India correspondent for the NPR where she shared a screenshot of a notification by the Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY) which revealed that it has asked the blocking of 250 accounts -- accounts of reputable media and individuals -- because they made use of the hashtag #ModiPlanningFarmerGenocide on Saturday i.e. January 30.
The ministry said in the statement, ¡°Ministry of Electronics and IT directed Twitter to block around 250 tweets/Twitter accounts which were using #ModiPlanningFarmerGenocide hashtag and making fake, intimidatory and provocative tweets on Saturday (30th Jan).¡±
It added, ¡°This was done on the request of the Ministry of Home Affairs and law enforcement agencies to prevent any escalation of law and order in view of the on-going farmer agitation. Incitement to genocide is a grave threat to public order and therefore the Ministry of Electronics and IT ordered for blocking of these Twitter accounts and Tweets under Section 69A of the IT Act.¡±
The statement didn¡¯t shed any light on the accounts coming back online or if they¡¯ll be permitted to do so.?
A thread of tweets by the Internet Freedom Foundation has highlighted what Section 69A is all about and how it led to the shutting down of the aforementioned accounts. The thread highlights that the act and its IT Blocking Rules are put in place which prevents intermediaries like Twitter from revealing information of any kind, disclosing why the shutdown took place.?
It highlights how the confidentiality required under rule 16 of the IT Blocking Rules sort of cripples the user where he has the right to challenge the blocking but is unable to do so as they lack access to the legal orders.?
As per MeitY, the aforementioned rule has been put in place to protect complaints and whistleblowers but hasn¡¯t really explained why blocking orders issued by government officials cannot be provided after redacting personal details.?