Twitter and Meta had earlier defended their power to remove posts or user accounts. (Representational)
The Indian government reversed its stance, calling out Twitter Inc. and Meta Platforms Inc. for suspending accounts that violate the social media giants' community guidelines.
Twitter's decision to suspend lawyer Sanjay Hegde's account about three years ago violates the Indian constitution and free speech rights, the Ministry of Information Technology said in a court filing last week, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
This follows a filing last month, where the government said Meta and Twitter must follow Indian laws that require the firms to give users a reasonable chance to defend themselves before a post is removed or the account suspended, except in extreme cases such as content relating to rape threats or terrorism, the people said, asking not to be identified as the details are private.
The government's current stance contrasts with a 2019 filing, when it said the matter was for Hegde and Twitter to resolve.
A ruling on this batch of cases with the Delhi High Court can decide tech companies' powers of censorship in the country of more than 1.3 billion people, at a time when Elon Musk's views on content moderation are in focus globally. It also adds a new dimension to the Indian government's long-running feud with social media firms.
Twitter declined to comment while Facebook and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology did not respond to requests for comments.
Public Duty
The two tech giants have been repeatedly at odds with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's administration's push to regulate big social media under the information technology rules of 2021. In a court case last year, Twitter agreed to comply with new rules while Meta has challenged in court the rules that can also force its messaging platform WhatsApp to break its encryption.
Both Twitter and Meta have in separate filings defended their power to remove posts or user accounts saying they follow their community guidelines and terms of service agreed by users, according to the people familiar. Petitioners have argued that social media giants have practically gained a duopoly and they perform a public function.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)