While the dispute concerns specific accounts and content, experts indicate the outcome could have major repercussions as a "bellwether for this ongoing battle about internet freedom," according to research director Allie Funk at Freedom House.
Twitter's lawsuit focuses on section 69A of India's Information Technology laws passed in 2000, which allow the government to issue blocking orders requiring intermediaries to remove content deemed a risk to India's security or sovereignty. The filing asserts that government requests are excessive, sometimes targeting entire accounts.
Jason Pielemeier, executive director at the Global Network Initiative, notes that "It will reverberate for all intermediaries," including mobile network operators and ISPs, making it applicable to content restriction choke points.
If Twitter loses, the government could censor whole websites and streaming platforms like Netflix or Amazon Prime, making it harder for platforms to resist. Rules established around 2009 prevented platforms from publicly disclosing blocking orders received.
Twitter's case does not challenge the constitutionality of section 69A but alleges that certain blocking orders do not meet the government's own standards and violate users' free speech rights.
India's IT laws allow secret blocking orders, making it difficult for users to understand censorship reasons or seek reversal. In 2018, the government blocked satirical website www.dowrycalculator.com owned by journalist Tanul Thakur without explanation. Thakur stated the site "point out this prominent social evil" regarding dowries.
Thakur was not informed of the block and began a legal battle for transparency. He told Outlook India: "I wanted something funny, entertaining but which also pokes fun at the patriarchal structure."
In May, the Delhi High Court ruled that the Ministry had to produce the original blocking order copy for Thakur. However, individual users and public interest groups lack insight into blocking orders, and few can sustain lengthy legal battles like Thakur's four-year effort.
This positioning makes major tech companies like Twitter a critical bulwark against government censorship. Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now stated: "The only entities who really know the nature of the problem and the deeply troubling human rights-harming blocking orders we're seeing are the government itself and the tech companies."
Funk notes that "strategic litigation" like Twitter's case can be one of the most effective avenues to protect user rights, challenge invasive surveillance, or reverse internet shutdowns.
Twitter has consistently pushed back on censorship more than most social media companies. In February 2021, India introduced new IT rules requiring platforms to respond to government takedown requests within 15 days and appoint a local representative legally responsible for compliance.
Initially, Twitter resisted some blocking orders and delayed appointing an in-country representative. In May 2021, after Twitter labeled a BJP spokesperson's tweet as "manipulated media," police searched Twitter's Delhi and Gurgaon offices. By July, the government said non-compliance meant losing safe harbor protections.
By August, Twitter capitulated. Mishi Choudhary, legal director at the Software Freedom Law Center, stated: "The government is not shy about using police power to send the signal that employees will be under threat."
India is Twitter's third largest market after the US and Japan. However, Choudhary suggests tech companies have partly invited government scrutiny by not engaging with civil society or governments outside Western markets similarly to their US or European practices.
Twitter's lawsuit coincides with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's right-wing BJP government widening crackdowns on dissent, allegedly using NSO Group's Pegasus spyware to surveil activists. Mohammad Zubair, cofounder of fact-checking organization Alt News, was arrested June 27 for a 2018 tweet authorities claimed insulted Hindu religious beliefs.
Alt News regularly fact-checked right-wing misinformation networks supporting the BJP. Just five days before Zubair's arrest, he received notification that his account had a government blocking order from Twitter. A Twitter representative declined to confirm whether Zubair's account was among those being challenged.
Chima observed that "There are members of India's ruling political party at the federal level who seem particularly worried that there'll be increased pressure on right-wing extremist voices in India," regularly attempting to preemptively intimidate Twitter.
Chima characterizes the government's accountability arguments as a "dog whistle" intended to warn companies against resisting government orders rather than calls for ethical operation. Blocking orders have increased significantly since 2014 as protesters increasingly used the internet, with massive numbers issued from 2020 onward.
