X Corp Friday compared the Sahyog Portal to a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” during a hearing before the Karnataka High Court regarding its plea against takedown orders.
X has been arguing in the high court that takedown orders should be issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, and not 79 (3) (b) of the same Act. It has also objected to the Sahyog Portal for intermediaries, referring to it in an earlier hearing as a “censorship portal”.
Senior Advocate K G Raghavan Friday began X’s rejoinder to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s representation on the Union Government’s perspective. Mehta had concluded his representation in the previous hearing.
Commencing his arguments before the High Court, Raghavan stated, “It (Sahyog) is very innocuously termed, but it is… a wolf in a sheep’s garment. There is no dispute that the government can communicate with intermediaries that something may be unlawful… Of course, we will operate within the laws of India. The issue is simply when such a communication results in a loss of safe harbour.”
(‘Safe harbour’ protections shield intermediaries like X from liability regarding content posted on their portals.)
Raghavan added, “Having given me statutory protection, can you take it away in a manner not known to law?”
He also raised concerns about government officials deciding on legality in the context of Section 79 (3) (b) of the IT Act, arguing, “An officer sitting in any remote corner of the country may tell you… you will lose your safe harbour… A court order issued by a court of law such as in the nature of interim injunction does not depend on 79 (3) b to be issued.”
Story continues below this ad
Contrary to previous arguments by the Centre, Raghavan argued that safe harbour is a matter of right rather than an exemption.
He later stated, “We have 980 central statutes, something like 7,500 plus state statutes… an authority can say under any one of these I come to the conclusion that you have done an unlawful act. On my saying so, you lose safe harbour protections… It is unfathomable that these officers will form a conclusion, become judges to say that my action is unlawful or not. What happens to all the authorities under those laws to administer them? They will become redundant.”
The matter is set to be heard next on July 29.
