Supreme Court upholds Delhi Assembly panel’s right to summon Facebook.
New Delhi:
Observing that digital platforms like Facebook have become power centers with the potential to influence opinion, the Supreme Court on Thursday said they should be held accountable, saying it was difficult to accept the “simplistic approach” adopted by Facebook. That this is a forum only posting to third parties. Information and has no role in generating, controlling or modifying that matter.
Observing that the national capital cannot tolerate any repetition of the riots witnessed last year, the Supreme Court asserted that India’s ‘unity in diversity’ cannot be hampered and Facebook’s role in this context should be seen. Whatever the powers.
“This (unity in diversity) cannot be obstructed at any cost or under any liberties by a giant like Facebook claiming ignorance or lack of any significant role,” the court said, and Facebook India The petition filed by Ajit, the Vice Chairman and MD of the company was dismissed. Mohan and others challenged the summons issued by the Delhi Assembly’s Peace and Harmony Committee for failing to appear as witnesses in connection with last year’s North-East Delhi riots in which 53 people were killed and 200 injured. .
Upholding the Delhi Assembly’s right to summon, the Supreme Court said Facebook has played a vital role in enabling free speech by giving voice to the voiceless and providing a means to evade state censorship, but it does not lose sight of the fact. Maybe it has become one together. “Platform for Disruptive Messages, Voices and Ideologies”.
Entities like Facebook, which has around 270 million users in India, have to be held accountable to those who delegate such power to them, it said.
A bench headed by Justice SK Kaul said that the Delhi Legislative Assembly and its committee have the power to compel the presence of members and outsiders on the basis of their prerogative. Acknowledging the distribution of power, it said that though law and order and police do not come under the legislative domain of the Delhi Assembly, the concept of peace and harmony in the larger context goes far beyond this.
It said that in any case, the representative of the social media giant will have the right not to answer questions directly related to these two areas.
In its 188-page judgment, the bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy, said that members and non-members alike may be directed to appear before the committee and appear on oath and Facebook Can’t stop myself from presenting myself as new. He was issued summons on February 3, 2021.
“The need to go into this incident (riots) from both legal and social point of view cannot be overstated. The capital of the country cannot tolerate any repetition of the incident and thus, saw the role of Facebook in this context. should go. By powers. Against this background, the Assembly demanded the constitution of a Peace and Harmony Committee.”
Noting that Facebook is playing a vital role in giving voice to different sections of the society across the world, the court said that it is to be noted that their platform has also hosted disruptive voices full of misinformation.
“Our country’s vast population makes it an important destination for Facebook. We are probably more diverse than all of Europe in local culture, food, clothing, language, religion, traditions and yet it has a history that is now commonly called It is known as “Unity in Diversity”.
The court said that in this modern technological age, it would be “very simple” for the petitioners to argue that they are a forum for exchange of ideas without playing any significant role in themselves – particularly their way of functioning and business model. Seeing it.
It also said that the election process, which is the foundation of a democratic government, is threatened by “social media manipulation” and that digital platforms can be “sometimes unregulated” and face their own challenges.
The Supreme Court observed that the information explosion in the digital age is capable of creating new challenges that are transforming the debate on issues where views can be widely divided and the successful functioning of liberal democracy can be ensured only When citizens are able to make informed decisions.
On the matter relating to summons issued by the Delhi Legislative Assembly, it said that there is no dispute about the right of the assembly or committee to proceed on the ground of breach of privilege and the power to compel attendance by initiating privilege proceedings is a necessary power.
“In the given facts of the case, the issue of privileges is premature,” the bench said, adding, “It is also pre-emptive to propagate conflict between privilege powers and certain fundamental rights in the present case.”
It said the technological age has led to the creation of digital platforms – not like railway platforms where the arrival and departure of trains were regulated.
“Because of the platform they provide, their influence extends to populations across borders. Facebook is one such corporation.”
The court said that in the national context, Facebook is the most popular social media platform in India with about 27 crore registered users. It added that such vast powers must come with responsibility and institutions like Facebook must be held accountable to those who delegate such power to them.
“Facebook has an impact on 1/3 of the planet’s population today! In India, Facebook claims to be the most popular social media with 270 million registered users. Such breadth of reach cannot be without responsibility as these platforms have become power centers themselves, have the potential to influence vast sections of opinion,” the court said.
“In the perspective of the above, it is difficult to accept the simplistic approach adopted by Facebook – that it is merely a platform for posting third party information and has no role in generating, controlling or modifying that information. “
.