Facebook India Vice President and Managing Director Ajit Mohan moves the Supreme Court against the convening of the Delhi Assembly Committee, which is investigating the social media giant’s alleged failure to crack down on hate speech, saying that the subject falls within the exclusive domain of the Union. from India.
The assembly panel on peace and harmony is investigating complaints about the “role or complicity of Facebook officials in the Delhi riots” that occurred in February.
As Facebook had refused to attend the first call, the assembly panel had to send a second call.
On September 15, the committee, led by the Aam Aadmi MLA Raghav Chadha Party, asked Facebook to ensure that company executives appear before the panel at its next meeting, warning that a refusal will lead to proceedings of ” violation of privileges “against officials.” Refusing to appear before the committee is a contempt for the Delhi legislature. This shows that Facebook has something to hide, “said Chadha.
In a letter to the committee, Facebook said Parliament is already investigating the issue and asked the Delhi panel to withdraw its subpoena.
As the issues raised by the notice involve an issue within the exclusive domain of the Union of India, and the issues are under active consideration by Parliament, we respectfully oppose the notice and ask you to withdraw it, “said the Facebook’s director of trust and security, Vikram Langeh said in the letter to Chadha.
Chadha said Facebook has blatantly refused to participate, instead seizing the opportunity to dispel the allegations and restore people’s faith and trust.
“The refusal to attend is in contempt of the powers granted to the assembly by the Constitution. If a matter is being investigated in Parliament, that does not prevent the Delhi assembly from investigating the matter. The state legislature functions independently of Parliament. In this case, the problem is also different. The parliament committee is looking into “safeguarding the rights of citizens and preventing misuse of online / social media platforms, including a special emphasis on women’s safety in the digital space.” The parliament committee is not investigating any issues related to the Delhi riots and the role of Facebook, “Chadha said.
The petitioner, in challenging the summons dated September 10 and 18, has also alleged that the summons violates the petitioner’s fundamental right under article 19 (Right to speech and expression) and article 21 (Right to life and liberty personal) guaranteed by the Constitution.
Facebook claimed that it is an “intermediary” as defined in the Information and Technology Act. Adding that, as an intermediary under the IT Law, Facebook is immune from liability for third-party content on the Facebook Service.
In the 169-page petition, Facebook has sought instructions to withdraw the subpoena and orders preventing the committee from taking enforcement action against FB in compliance with the issued subpoena.
The social media platform has faced criticism over accusations that it favors the government led by the ruling Bharatiya Janata party in India, to further its own business goals in Asia’s third-largest economy.
.
