Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, has taken legal action against the Indian government over alleged digital censorship. The company has filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court, arguing that the government is misusing its authority to force content takedowns without following due legal process.
Elon Musk’s X Fights Back: Challenges Indian Government Over Digital Censorship
The dispute centers around India’s use of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology (IT) Act and the Sahyog Portal, which X claims are being leveraged to impose arbitrary restrictions on online content. According to X, these mechanisms allow the government to issue content removal requests without the necessary judicial oversight.
The conflict escalated when the government asked X to provide explanations for certain responses generated by its AI chatbot, Grok. X argues that these demands violate a 2015 Supreme Court ruling, which states that online content can only be blocked through a court order or under the structured process of Section 69A of the IT Act. The company believes the government’s use of Section 79(3)(b) is an attempt to bypass these legal safeguards.
Court Proceedings and Previous Legal Disputes
During the initial hearing, government representatives stated that X had not faced any penalties for non-compliance with the Sahyog Portal. However, the court allowed X to challenge any future actions taken against it. The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 27.
This is not the first time X has contested India’s content regulation policies. In 2022, the company challenged takedown orders under Section 69A, arguing that the process lacked transparency and infringed on freedom of speech.
Concerns Over the Sahyog Portal
A significant part of X’s legal challenge focuses on the Sahyog Portal, a government-run system that enables various agencies and state police to request content removal. X claims that this platform functions as a parallel censorship tool, allowing authorities to bypass the legal procedures outlined in the IT Act.
The company also opposes the government’s demand that it appoint a dedicated “Nodal Officer” to ensure compliance with content removal requests from the portal. X argues that there is no legal basis for such a requirement and that it places an unnecessary burden on social media platforms.
AI Chatbot Grok at the Center of Controversy
The case has drawn further attention due to X’s AI chatbot, Grok, which has been criticized for generating politically sensitive or controversial responses. Unlike other AI models that undergo strict moderation, people perceive Grok as having fewer restrictions, which makes its outputs less predictable. Critics argue that such AI tools could spread misinformation or offensive content, raising concerns about the need for responsible AI governance.
However, X insists that regulators must legally justify any actions against Grok and avoid enforcing them arbitrarily. The company insists that the government should follow established legal procedures rather than imposing interventions through executive directives.
X’s Legal Demands
In its petition, X has urged the court to:
- Declare that Section 79(3)(b) does not grant the government the authority to issue content takedown orders.
- Invalidate all takedown requests issued under this provision.
- Suspend enforcement of content removal requests through the Sahyog Portal.
- Reinforce Section 69A as the sole legal framework for blocking online content.
Potential Impact on Digital Governance
This legal battle will have significant implications for digital governance in India. A ruling in favour of X could set a precedent for how online platforms engage with government regulations and protect freedom of expression. On the other hand, if the court upholds the government’s actions, it may pave the way for stricter control over digital content in the country.