#FactCheck -Misleading Social Media Claim Targets University Over Viral Video

Introduction

The Telecommunications Act of 2023 was passed by Parliament in December, receiving the President's assent and being published in the official Gazette on December 24, 2023. The act is divided into 11 chapters 62 sections and 3 schedules. Sections 1, 2, 10-30, 42-44, 46, 47, 50-58, 61 and 62 already took effect on June 26, 2024. 

On July 04, 2024, the Centre issued a Gazetted Notification and sections 6-8, 48 and 59(b) were notified to be effective from July 05, 2024. The Act aims to amend and consolidate the laws related to telecommunication services, telecommunication networks, and spectrum assignment and it ‘repeals’ certain older colonial-era legislations like the Indian Telegraph Act 1885 and Indian Wireless Telegraph Act 1933. Due to the advancements in technology in the telecom sector, the new law is enacted. 

On 18 July 2024 Thursday, the telecom minister while launching the theme of Indian Mobile Congress (IMC), announced that all rules and provisions of the new Telecom Act would be notified within the next 180 days, hence making the Act operational at full capacity. 

Important definitions under Telecommunications Act, 2023

1. Authorisation: Section 2(d) entails “authorisation” means a permission, by whatever name called, granted under this Act for— (i) providing telecommunication services; (ii) establishing, operating, maintaining or expanding telecommunication networks; or (iii) possessing radio equipment.
2. Telecommunication: Section 2(p) entails “Telecommunication” means transmission, emission or reception of any messages, by wire, radio, optical or other electro-magnetic systems, whether or not such messages have been subjected to rearrangement, computation or other processes by any means in the course of their transmission, emission or reception.
3. Telecommunication Network: Section 2(s) entails “telecommunication network” means a system or series of systems of telecommunication equipment or infrastructure, including terrestrial or satellite networks or submarine networks, or a combination of such networks, used or intended to be used for providing telecommunication services, but does not include such telecommunication equipment as notified by the Central Government.
4. Telecommunication Service: Section 2(t) entails “telecommunication service” means any service for telecommunication.

‍

Measures for Cyber Security for the Telecommunication Network/Services

Section 22 of the Telecommunication Act, 2023 talks about the protection of telecommunication networks and telecommunication services. The section specifies that the centre may provide rules to ensure the cybersecurity of telecommunication networks and telecommunication services. Such measures may include the collection, analysis and dissemination of traffic data that is generated, transmitted, received or stored in telecommunication networks. ‘Traffic data’ can include any data generated, transmitted, received, or stored in telecommunication networks – such as type, duration, or time of a telecommunication. 

Section 22 further empowers the central government to declare any telecommunication network, or part thereof, as Critical Telecommunication Infrastructure. It may further provide for standards, security practices, upgradation requirements and procedures to be implemented for such Critical Telecommunication Infrastructure. 

CyberPeace Policy Wing Outlook:

The Telecommunication Act, 2023 marks a significant change & growth in the telecom sector by providing a robust regulatory framework, encouraging research and development, promoting infrastructure development, and measures for consumer protection. The Central Government is empowered to authorize individuals for (a) providing telecommunication services, (b) establishing, operating, maintaining, or expanding telecommunication networks, or (c) possessing radio equipment. Section 48 of the act provides no person shall possess or use any equipment that blocks telecommunication unless permitted by the Central Government. 

The Central Government will protect users by implementing different measures, such as the requirement of prior consent of users for receiving particular messages, keeping a 'Do Not Disturb' register to stop unwanted messages, the mechanism to enable users to report any malware or specified messages received, the preparation and maintenance of “Do Not Disturb” register, to ensure that users do not receive specified messages or class of specified messages without prior consent. The authorized entity providing telecommunication services will also be required to create an online platform for users for their grievances pertaining to telecommunication services. 

In certain limited circumstances such as national security measures, disaster management and public safety, the act contains provisions empowering the Government to take temporary possession of telecom services or networks from authorised entity; direct interception or disclosure of messages, with measures to be specified in rulemaking. This entails that the government gains additional controls in case of emergencies to ensure security and public order. However, this has to be balanced with appropriate measures protecting individual privacy rights and avoiding any unintended arbitrary actions. 

Taking into account the cyber security in the telecommunication sector, the government is empowered under the act to introduce standards for cyber security for telecommunication services and telecommunication networks; and encryption and data processing in telecommunication. 

The act also promotes the research and development and pilot projects under Digital Bharat Nidhi. The act also promotes the approach of digital by design by bringing online dispute resolution and other frameworks. Overall the approach of the government is noteworthy as they realise the need for updating the colonial era legislation considering the importance of technological advancements and keeping pace with the digital and technical revolution in the telecommunication sector. 

References:

1. The Telecommunications Act, 2023 https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:88cb04ff-2cce-4663-ad41-88aafc81a416
2. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2031057
3. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2027941
4. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/telecom/telecom-news/new-telecom-act-will-be-notified-in-180-days-bsnl-4g-rollout-is-monitored-on-a-daily-basis-scindia/articleshow/111851845.cms?from=mdr
5. https://www.azbpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Update-Staggered-Enforcement-of-Telecommunications-Act-2023.pdf
6. https://telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com/blog/analysing-the-impact-of-telecommunications-act-2023-on-digital-india-mission/111828226

‍

Procedural History: 

‍

The case started with a 2011 Madras High Court ruling that included the appellant’s personal information. In the case discussed, the court decided in 2024, the appellant went to the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court to request that his name and other identifying information from that previous ruling be redacted. He argued that his right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution was violated by the ongoing release of such private information into the public arena. He claimed that the revelation had hurt him in real ways, such as having his application for an Australian visa denied. Therefore, without compromising the ideals of open justice, the current procedures aimed to have the court recognize a person’s “Right to be Forgotten” within a broader framework of privacy and data protection.

‍

Background and Factual Matrix

‍

The appellant was charged under Sections 417 and 376 of the IPC. The trial court convicted him in 201, but later, the High Court in 2014 fully, completely and unconditionally acquitted him, which was not based on the benefit of doubt. Following the acquittal, he remarried and has three children. The judgment of both the High Court and the Trial Court has personal and intimate details about him. Being available in the public domain has caused him significant repercussions, as he was denied a visa to travel to Australia by authorities, citing the criminal cases. The appellant has filed a plea seeking a mandamus directing the Registrar General, Additional Registrar General, and Registrar (IT-Statistics) as R1, R2, R3 to redact his name and other identities from the acquittal judgment. He has sought a direction from Ikanoon Software Development Private Limited (R4) to reflect the redaction in its publication. 

‍

Issue 

‍

1. Whether a writ of mandamus can lie against a High Court for redaction of personal details from its own judgment, or does such a prayer tantamount to a High Court issuing a writ against itself?
2. Whether the High Court, being a Court of Record under Article 215 of the Indian Constitution, is entitled to preserve its record for perpetuity in its original form without any modification or redaction?
3. Whether the ‘Right to be Forgotten' can be recognised and enforced in the absence of a specific statutory provision or Supreme Court direction, given that it constitutes an exception to the fundamental principle of open courts and open justice?

‍

Adjudication and Reasoning

The division bench has allowed the Writ appeal and granted the following relief:

1. R4 directed to take down the judgment in Crl.A. (MD) No.321 of 2011 dated 30.04.2014 forthwith.
2. R1 to R3 directed to redact the name and other details of the Writ Petitioner relating to his identity from the judgment dated 30.04.2014 in Crl.A.(MD) No. 321 of 2011 and ensure that only the redacted judgment is available for publication or for uploading.

‍

Rule 

‍

1. Courts have a wide discretion in deciding whether to allow redaction or not. Such discretion can either be granted at the request of the party seeking redaction or, in appropriate cases, even suo moto by the court.
2. The accused who have earned full, complete and unconditional acquittal without any benefit of doubt have a legitimate claim to move forward for redaction of personal information.
3. The open Court doesn’t require absolute disclosure of all personal information, and the courts, while deciding the concern of privacy and the right to ensure that in litigations to leave behind parts of their past which are no longer relevant, have to balance the concept of open Court on the one hand and privacy concerns of a citizen on the other.
4. As the High Court is the repository of a wide range of information and is entitled to preserve the original record in perpetuity. However, without diluting the sanctity of the original record, the public reflection of that record can be moderated to preserve the privacy of the person to whom that record pertains.

‍

Reasoning 

‍

1. Drawing on the judgment K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the court found Article 21 to protect not only informational privacy but also the "right to be forgotten," which gives individuals the right to request the deletion of any personal data when there is no longer any legitimate public interest in retaining such information. Such irreparable reputational damage is thus an infringement on constitutional privacy that demands judicial redaction. 
2. The court rejected the argument that a writ against its own order is impermissible, drawing a distinction between challenging the legal correctness of a judgment and seeking redaction of personal information. Allowing redaction will not question the validity of the judgment; rather, it will simply change its public appearance to ensure privacy.
3. Since a High Court is a Court of Record with an obligation to preserve its judgments in their unaltered form forever, the court held here that such internal maintenance of complete records was not incompatible with the issuance of a redacted public version. Institutional integrity is maintained when the original kept in the archives is supplemented with a public version that masks the privacy areas.
4. Open justice principles work to establish transparency, accountability, and public confidence, but these are not absolute. The court took a proportionality stance: personal identifiers, where they neither educate nor have precedential value and continue to inflict harm, may be expunged without affecting the established legal principles of judgment.
5. Although the DPDP Act exempts courts from several statutory obligations, the court held that it can, by virtue of its inherent discretion, protect personal data, and in so doing, exercise that power without the need for any legislative command. Traditionally the Madras High Court rules provide for the possibility of restriction of certified copies, thus establishing redaction as feasible both legally and administratively.

‍

Introduction

Social media is the new platform for free speech and expressing one’s opinions. The latest news breaks out on social media and is often used by political parties to propagate their parties during the elections. Hashtag (#)is the new weapon, a powerful hashtag that goes a long way in making an impact in society that so at a global level. Various hashtags have gained popularity in the last years, such as – #blacklivesmatter, #metoo, #pride, #cybersecurity, and many more, which were influential in spreading awareness among the people regarding various social issues and taboos, which then were removed from multiple cultures. Social media is strengthened by social media influencers who are famous personalities with a massive following as they create regular content that the users consume and share with their friends. Social media is all about the message and its speed, and hence issues like misinformation and disinformation are widespread on nearly all social media platforms, so the influencers play a keen role in making sure the content on social media is in compliance with its community and privacy guidelines.

The Know-How

The Department of Consumer Affairs under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution released a guide, ‘Endorsements Know-hows!’ for celebrities, influencers, and virtual influencers on social media platforms, The guide aims to ensure that individuals do not mislead their audiences when endorsing products or services and that they are in compliance with the Consumer Protection Act and any associated rules or guidelines. Advertisements are no longer limited to traditional media like print, television, or radio, with the increasing reach of digital platforms and social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, there has been a rise in the influence of virtual influencers, celebrities, and social media influencers. This has led to an increased risk of consumers being misled by advertisements and unfair trade practices by these individuals on social media platforms. Endorsements must be made in simple, clear language, and terms such as “advertisement,” “sponsored,” or “paid promotion” can be used. They should not endorse any product or service and service in which they have done due diligence or that they have not personally used or experienced. The Act established guidelines for protecting consumers from unfair trade practices and misleading advertisements. The Department of Consumer Affairs published Guidelines for prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements for Misleading Advertisements, 2022, on 9th June 2022. These guidelines outline the criteria for valid advertisements and the responsibilities of manufacturers, service providers, advertisers, and advertising agencies. These guidelines also touched upon celebrities and endorsers. It states that misleading advertisements in any form, format, or medium are prohibited by law.

The guidelines apply to social media influencers as well as virtual avatars promoting products and services online. The disclosures should be easy to notice in post descriptions, where you can usually find hashtags or links. It should also be prominent enough to be noticeable in the content,

Changes Expected

The new guidelines will bring about uniformity in social media content in respect of privacy and the opinions of different people. The primary issue being addressed is misinformation, which was at its peak during the Covid-19 pandemic and impacted millions of people worldwide. The aspect of digital literacy and digital etiquette is a fundamental art of social media ethics, and hence social media influencers and celebrities can go a long way in spreading awareness about the same among common people and regular social media users. The increasing threats of cybercrimes and various exploitations over cyberspace can be eradicated with the help of efficient awareness and education among the youth and the vulnerable population, and the influencers can easily do the same, so its time that the influencers understand their responsibility of leading the masses online and create a healthy secure cyber ecosystem. Failing to follow the guidelines will make social media influencers liable for a fine of up to Rs 10 lakh. In the case of repeated offenders, the penalty can go up to Rs 50 lakh.

Conclusion

The size of the social media influencer market in India in 2022 was $157 million. It could reach as much as $345 million by 2025. Indian advertising industry’s self-regulatory body Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), shared that Influencer violations comprise almost 30% of ads taken up by ASCI, hence this legal backing for disclosure requirements is a welcome step. The Ministry of Consumer Affairs had been in touch with ASCI to review the various global guidelines on influencers. The social media guidelines from Clairfirnia and San Fransisco share the same basis, and hence guidelines inspired by different countries will allow the user and the influencer to understand the global perspective and work towards securing the bigger picture. As we know that cyberspace has no geographical boundaries and limitations; hence now is the time to think beyond conventional borders and start contributing towards securing and safeguarding global cyberspace.