X pushes back on Indian court over censorship portal

Social media company X announced Monday it will fight a court decision allowing millions of Indian police officers to demand content takedowns through a government-run online ￰0￱ platform said it would appeal the ruling from Karnataka’s High Court, which last week rejected X’s attempt to shut down India’s content removal processes. X is deeply concerned by the recent order from the Karnataka court in India, which will allow millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders through a secretive online portal called the ￰1￱ new regime has no basis in the law, circumvents Section 69A of… — Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) September 29, 2025 At the center of the dispute is an online portal named Sahyog, which gives police officers authority to request content removals by simply claiming material is illegal.

X said the system operates without court oversight or legal protections for people whose posts get flagged, and companies face criminal charges if they don’t ￰2￱ isn’t the first time X has clashed with Indian ￰3￱ company has previously described government content controls as ￰4￱ Minister Narendra Modi’s administration says the system helps address illegal online material and creates responsibility on the internet. X’s owner Elon Musk, who calls himself a strong defender of free speech, has disagreed with governments in multiple countries over following rules and removing ￰5￱ the Indian case targets the fundamental structure of internet regulation in the world’s largest country by ￰6￱ expanded online policing since 2023 under Modi Modi’s government increased online policing starting in 2023, letting far more officials file removal orders and send them straight to technology companies through a website that launched in ￰7￱ officials previously used Section 69a of the Information Technology Act from 2000 to make social platforms remove ￰8￱ section lets the government block online information for reasons including national security, sovereignty, or public order by sending orders to ￰9￱ government has faced growing criticism for not being transparent about removal orders and has gone to court many times.

India’s Supreme Court ruled in 2015 and 2020 that Section 69a is legal but said blocking orders must be specific, follow proper procedures, and not create sweeping ￰10￱ Sahyog, Modi’s government started using a different legal rule, Section 79 of the IT ￰11￱ platform works under Section 79(3)(b), which says companies lose legal protection if they don’t remove illegal content when the government tells them ￰12￱ policy experts and lawyers note that courts haven’t reviewed this provision yet, letting the government avoid the protections the Supreme Court required for Section 69a. 72 companies joined Sahyog platform except X The government requires all social media platforms to join Sahyog and assign someone to handle takedown ￰13￱ least 72 companies have signed up for the government platform, including WhatsApp, Instagram, Apple, LinkedIn, Google, Telegram, and Snapchat, according to Manish Garg, who directs the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre, an agency under India’s Ministry of Home ￰14￱ from that agency run Sahyog, Garg said in response to an information request from Al Jazeera.

X hasn’t joined the platform and instead sued Modi’s government, arguing that Sahyog functions as a censorship ￰15￱ court documents, the company said thousands of unnamed officers can single-handedly decide information is illegal and block it across India without the checks and balances required under Section ￰16￱ agencies still send X takedown requests through the ￰17￱ requests have nothing to do with national ￰18￱ Choudhary, a technology lawyer who started the Software Freedom Law Center in New Delhi, said the name Sahyog means collaboration in Hindi and reveals years of close cooperation between officials and platforms that have helped make censorship effective while talking about free speech ￰19￱ called the platform the latest attempt by Modi’s government to expand censorship authority, saying that giving police officers this power creates unlimited discretion and allows unrestricted ￰20￱ Software Freedom Law Center has also filed a case in Delhi High Court challenging whether Sahyog is ￰21￱ seen where it ￰22￱ in Cryptopolitan Research and reach crypto’s sharpest investors and builders.