#FactCheck: Old Protest Video Misleadingly Shared as Police Action During BRICS Summit

Introduction

To combat the problem of annoying calls and SMS, telecom regulator TRAI has urged service providers to create a uniform digital platform in two months that will allow them to request, maintain, and withdraw customers’ approval for promotional calls and messages. In the initial stage, only subscribers will be able to initiate the process of registering their consent to receive promotional calls and SMS, and later, business entities will be able to contact customers to seek their consent to receive promotional messages, according to a statement issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on Saturday.

TRAI Directs Telecom Providers to Set Up Digital Platform

TRAI has now directed all access providers to develop and deploy the Digital Consent Acquisition (DCA) facility for creating a unified platform and process to digitally register customers’ consent across all service providers and principal entities. Consent is received and maintained under the current system by several key entities such as banks, other financial institutions, insurance firms, trading companies, business entities, real estate businesses, and so on.

The purpose, scope of consent, and the principal entity or brand name shall be clearly mentioned in the consent-seeking message sent over the short code,” according to the statement.

It stated that only approved online or app links, call-back numbers, and so on will be permitted to be used in consent-seeking communications.

TRAI issued guidelines to guarantee that all voice-based Telemarketers are brought under a single Distributed ledger technology (DLT) platform for more efficient monitoring of nuisance calls and unwanted communications. It also instructs operators to actively deploy AI/ML-based anti-phishing systems as well as to integrate tech solutions on the DLT platform to deal with malicious calls and texts.

TRAI has issued two separate Directions to Access Service Providers under TCCCPR-2018 (Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations) to ensure that all promotional messages are sent through Registered Telemarketers (RTMs) using approved Headers and Message Templates on Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT) platform, and to stop misuse of Headers and Message Templates,” the regulator said in a statement.

Users can already block telemarketing calls and texts by texting 1909 from their registered mobile number. By dialing 1909, customers can opt out of getting advertising calls by activating the do not disturb (DND) feature.

Telecom providers operate DLT platforms, and businesses involved in sending bulk promotional or transactional SMS must register by providing their company information, including sender IDs and SMS templates.

According to the instructions, telecom companies will send consent-seeking messages using the common short code 127. The goal, extent of consent, and primary entity/brand name must be clearly stated in the consent-seeking message delivered via the shortcode.

TRAI stated that only whitelisted URLs/APKs (Android package kits file format)/OTT links/call back numbers, etc., shall be used in consent-seeking messages.

Telcos must “ensure that promotional messages are not transmitted by unregistered telemarketers or telemarketers using telephone numbers (10 digits numbers).” Telecom providers have been urged to act against all erring telemarketers in accordance with the applicable regulations and legal requirements.

Users can, however, refuse to receive any consent-seeking messages launched by any significant Telcos have been urged to create an SMS/IVR (interactive voice response)/online service for this purpose.

According to TRAI’s timeline, the consent-taking process by primary companies will begin on September 1.According to a nationwide survey conducted by a local circle, 66% of mobile users continue to receive three or more bothersome calls per day, the majority of which originate from personal cell numbers.

There are scams surfacing on the internet with new types of scams, like WhatsApp international call scams. The latest scam is targeting Delhi police, the scammers pretend to be police officials of Delhi and ask for the personal details of the users and the calling them from a 9-digit number.

A recent scam

A Twitter user reported receiving an automated call from +91 96681 9555, stating, “This call is from Delhi Police.” It went on to ask her to stay in the queue since some of her documents needed to be picked up. Then he said he is a sub-inspector at New Delhi’s Kirti Nagar police station. He then questioned if she had lately misplaced her Aadhaar card, PAN card, or ATM card, to which she replied ‘no’. The fraudster then claims to be a cop and asks her to validate the final four digits of her card because they have discovered a card with her name on it. And so many other people tweeted about this.

The scams are constantly increasing as earlier these scammers asked for account details and claimed to be Delhi police and used 9-digit numbers for scamming people.

TRAI’s new guidelines regarding the consent to receive any promotional calls and messages to telecommunication providers will be able to curb the scams.

The e- KYC is an essential requirement as e-KYC offers a more secure identity verification process in an increasingly digital age that uses biometric technologies to provide quick results.

Conclusion

The aim is to prevent unwanted calls and communications sent to customers via digital methods without their permission. Once this platform is implemented, an organization can only send promotional calls or messages with the customer’s explicit approval. Companies use a variety of methods to notify clients about their products, including phone calls, text messages, emails, and social media. Customers, however, are constantly assaulted with the same calls and messages as a result of this practice. With the constant increase in scams, the new guideline of TRAI will also curb the calling of Scams. digital KYC prevents SIM fraud and offers a more secure identity verification method.

Introduction

There is a rising desire for artificial intelligence (AI) laws that limit threats to public safety and protect human rights while allowing for a flexible and inventive setting. Most AI policies prioritize the use of AI for the public good. The most compelling reason for AI innovation as a valid goal of public policy is its promise to enhance people's lives by assisting in the resolution of some of the world's most difficult difficulties and inefficiencies and to emerge as a transformational technology, similar to mobile computing. This blog explores the complex interplay between AI and internet governance from an Indian standpoint, examining the challenges, opportunities, and the necessity for a well-balanced approach.

Understanding Internet Governance

Before delving into an examination of their connection, let's establish a comprehensive grasp of Internet Governance. This entails the regulations, guidelines, and criteria that influence the global operation and management of the Internet. With the internet being a shared resource, governance becomes crucial to ensure its accessibility, security, and equitable distribution of benefits.

The Indian Digital Revolution

India has witnessed an unprecedented digital revolution, with a massive surge in internet users and a burgeoning tech ecosystem. The government's Digital India initiative has played a crucial role in fostering a technology-driven environment, making technology accessible to even the remotest corners of the country. As AI applications become increasingly integrated into various sectors, the need for a comprehensive framework to govern these technologies becomes apparent.

AI and Internet Governance Nexus

The intersection of AI and Internet governance raises several critical questions. How should data, the lifeblood of AI, be governed? What role does privacy play in the era of AI-driven applications? How can India strike a balance between fostering innovation and safeguarding against potential risks associated with AI?

• AI's Role in Internet Governance: 

Artificial Intelligence has emerged as a powerful force shaping the dynamics of the internet. From content moderation and cybersecurity to data analysis and personalized user experiences, AI plays a pivotal role in enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of Internet governance mechanisms. Automated systems powered by AI algorithms are deployed to detect and respond to emerging threats, ensuring a safer online environment.

A comprehensive strategy for managing the interaction between AI and the internet is required to stimulate innovation while limiting hazards. Multistakeholder models including input from governments, industry, academia, and civil society are gaining appeal as viable tools for developing comprehensive and extensive governance frameworks.

The usefulness of multistakeholder governance stems from its adaptability and flexibility in requiring collaboration from players with a possible stake in an issue. Though flawed, this approach allows for flaws that may be remedied using knowledge-building pieces. As AI advances, this trait will become increasingly important in ensuring that all conceivable aspects are covered.

The Need for Adaptive Regulations

While AI's potential for good is essentially endless, so is its potential for damage - whether intentional or unintentional. The technology's highly disruptive nature needs a strong, human-led governance framework and rules that ensure it may be used in a positive and responsible manner. The fast emergence of GenAI, in particular, emphasizes the critical need for strong frameworks. Concerns about the usage of GenAI may enhance efforts to solve issues around digital governance and hasten the formation of risk management measures.

Several AI governance frameworks have been published throughout the world in recent years, with the goal of offering high-level guidelines for safe and trustworthy AI development. The OECD's "Principles on Artificial Intelligence" (OECD, 2019), the EU's "Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI" (EU, 2019), and UNESCO's "Recommendations on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence" (UNESCO, 2021) are among the multinational organizations that have released their own principles. However, the advancement of GenAI has resulted in additional recommendations, such as the OECD's newly released "G7 Hiroshima Process on Generative Artificial Intelligence" (OECD, 2023).

Several guidance documents and voluntary frameworks have emerged at the national level in recent years, including the "AI Risk Management Framework" from the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a voluntary guidance published in January 2023, and the White House's "Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights," a set of high-level principles published in October 2022 (The White House, 2022). These voluntary policies and frameworks are frequently used as guidelines by regulators and policymakers all around the world. More than 60 nations in the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Europe had issued national AI strategies as of 2023 (Stanford University).

Conclusion

Monitoring AI will be one of the most daunting tasks confronting the international community in the next centuries. As vital as the need to govern AI is the need to regulate it appropriately. Current AI policy debates too often fall into a false dichotomy of progress versus doom (or geopolitical and economic benefits versus risk mitigation). Instead of thinking creatively, solutions all too often resemble paradigms for yesterday's problems. It is imperative that we foster a relationship that prioritizes innovation, ethical considerations, and inclusivity. Striking the right balance will empower us to harness the full potential of AI within the boundaries of responsible and transparent Internet Governance, ensuring a digital future that is secure, equitable, and beneficial for all.

References

1. The Key Policy Frameworks Governing AI in India - Access Partnership
2. AI in e-governance: A potential opportunity for India (indiaai.gov.in)
3. India and the Artificial Intelligence Revolution - Carnegie India - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
4. Rise of AI in the Indian Economy (indiaai.gov.in)
5. The OECD Artificial Intelligence Policy Observatory - OECD.AI
6. Artificial Intelligence | UNESCO
7. Artificial intelligence | NIST

Introduction

‍

Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals through its own gaps. States often find themselves navigating a shared frontier without a mutual guide or lines of law in an era of expanding digital boundaries and growing cyber damages. The United Nations General Assembly ratified the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on December 24, 2024, and more than sixty governments were in attendance in the signing ceremony on 24th & 25th October this year, marking a moment of institutional regeneration and global commitment. 

‍

A new Lexicon for Global Order

The old liberal order is being strained by growing nationalism, economic fracturing, populism, and great-power competition as often emphasised in the works of scholars like G. John Iken berry and John Mearsheimer. Multilateral arrangements become more brittle in such circumstances. Therefore, the new cybercrimes convention represents not only a legal tool but also a resurgence of international promise, a significant win for collective governance in an uncertain time. It serves as a reminder that institutions can be rebuilt even after they have been damaged. 

‍

In Discussion: The Fabric of the Digital Polis

‍

The digital sphere has become a contentious area. On the one hand, the US and its allies support stakeholder governance, robust individual rights, and open data flows. On the other hand, nations like China and Russia describe a “post-liberal cyber order” based on state mediation, heavily regulated flows, and sovereignty. Instead of focusing on ideological dichotomies, India, which is positioned as both a rising power and a voice of the Global South, has offered a viewpoint based on supply-chain security, data localisation, and capacity creation. Thus, rather than being merely a regulation, the treaty arises from a framework of strategic recalibration. 

‍

What Changed & Why it Matters

‍

There have been regional cybercrime accords up to this point, such as the Budapest Convention. The goal of this new international convention, which is accessible to all UN members, is to standardise definitions, evidence sharing and investigation instruments. 72 states signed the Hanoi signature event in October, 2025, demonstrating an unparalleled level of scope and determination. In addition to establishing structures for cooperative investigations, extradition, and the sharing of electronic evidence, it requires signatories to criminalise acts such as fraud, unlawful access to systems, data interference, and online child exploitation. 

For the first time, a legally obligatory global architecture aims to harmonise cross-border evidence flows, mutual legal assistance, and national procedural laws. Cybercrime offers genuine promise for community defence at a time when it is no longer incidental but existential, attacks on hospitals, schools and infrastructure are now common, according to the Global Observatory.

‍

Holding the Line: India’s Deliberate Path in the Age of Cyber Multilateralism 

‍

India takes a contemplative rather than a reluctant stance towards the UN Cybercrime Treaty. Though it played an active role during the drafting sessions and lent its voice to the shaping of global cyber norms, New Delhi is yet to sign the convention. Subtle but intentional, the reluctance suggests a more comprehensive reflection, an evaluation of how international obligations correspond with domestic constitutional protections, especially the right to privacy upheld by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017). 

Prudence is the reason for this halt. Policy circles speculate that the government is still assessing the treaty’s consequences for national data protection, surveillance regimes, and territorial sovereignty. Officials have not provided explicit justifications for India’s refusal to join. India’s position has frequently been characterised by striking a careful balance between digital sovereignty and taking part in cooperative international regimes. In earlier negotiations, India had even proposed including clauses to penalise “offensive messages” on social media, echoing the erstwhile Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, but the suggestion found little international traction. 

Advocates for digital rights such as Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now have warned that ensuring that the treaty’s implementation upholds constitutional privacy principles may be necessary for India to eventually endorse it. He contends that the treaty’s wording might not entirely meet India’s legal requirements in the absence of such voluntary pledges. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres praised the agreement as “a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defences against “cybercrime” during its signing in Hanoi. The issue for India is to make sure that multilateral collaboration develops in accordance with constitutional values rather than to reject that vision. Therefore, the path forward is one of assertion rather than absence, careful march towards a cyber future that protects freedom and sovereignty. 

‍

Sources: 

• https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12244&lid=7470 
• https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-72-nations-un-first-cybercrime-treaty-india-abstains-privacy/ ‍
• https://therecord.media/us-declines-signing-cybercrime-treaty