CarpeDiem IAS • CarpeDiem IAS • CarpeDiem IAS •

Amendment to IT Rules, 2021 — Accountability in Social Media Takedown Orders

23 Oct 2025 GS 2 Governance
Amendment to IT Rules, 2021 — Accountability in Social Media Takedown Orders Click to view full image

Context

  • The Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) is set to amend the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

  • The aim is to enhance accountability of government officers issuing takedown or flagging notices to social media platforms.

Key Provisions

  1. Accountability Clause Introduced

    • Officers issuing content takedown or warning notices must provide a reasoned intimation.

    • Orders will be issued only by senior officials:

      • Joint Secretary and above – Central Government.

      • Deputy Inspector-General (DIG) and above – State level.

  2. Rule Involved:

    • The amendment pertains to Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021.

    • This rule empowers officials to flag content such that platforms lose their “safe harbour” protection (legal immunity for user-generated content).

  3. Clarification Requirement

    • Notices under Rule 3(1)(d) must clearly state:

      • They serve as a warning that safe harbour does not apply to specific content.

      • They are not immediate takedown orders.

Safe Harbour Concept

  • Under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, intermediaries are exempt from liability for third-party content if they act as neutral platforms.

  • If content is flagged under Rule 3(1)(d), platforms may lose this immunity, making them legally responsible for the content.

Objective of the Amendment

  • To ensure transparency and procedural fairness in content regulation.

  • To prevent arbitrary censorship or misuse of takedown powers.

  • To enhance government accountability in digital governance.

Timeline

  • Amendment expected to be notified within the week.

  • To come into effect from November 15, 2025.

Judicial Context

  • Platform involved: X (formerly Twitter) had challenged Rule 3(1)(d) in the Karnataka High Court, calling it unconstitutional and arbitrary.

  • Judgment: The court upheld the government’s power to issue such notices.

  • Official clarification: The new safeguards are not linked to this case but are aimed at improving procedural clarity.

Significance

  • Promotes responsible governance in digital content regulation.

  • Strengthens checks and balances between government and tech intermediaries.

  • Reinforces rule-based digital regulation amid growing misinformation and censorship debates.

Challenges

  • Maintaining balance between free speech and regulation.

  • Implementation consistency across States.

  • Risk of bureaucratic delays or subjective interpretation of “harmful content.”

Way Forward

  • Establish standard operating procedures (SOPs) for issuing notices.

  • Integrate transparency reports by platforms on flagged content.

  • Align amendments with the upcoming Digital India Act framework for holistic governance.



← Back to list