Raising concerns over speech and privacy, SFLC.in urges the withdrawal of the draft IT rules, warning that expanded oversight could reshape online content regulation in India.
Delhi-based digital rights organisation SFLC.in has called on the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to withdraw the proposed amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2026, citing concerns over their potential impact on online speech and user rights.
In its submission to the ministry, the organisation argued that the draft amendments, released on 30 March 2026, could expand executive oversight of digital platforms and undermine constitutional protections related to freedom of expression. It said the proposals may affect intermediary liability, data protection safeguards, and the broader digital ecosystem.
A key concern raised relates to provisions requiring intermediaries to comply with advisories, guidelines and other directions issued by the ministry. SFLC.in stated that such instruments are executive in nature and lack statutory backing. Incorporating them into due diligence requirements under the Information Technology Act could, it argued, lead platforms to remove lawful content to limit legal risk.
The organisation also flagged the proposed extension of regulatory oversight to “news and current affairs” content hosted on intermediaries, including material posted by individual users. It said the definition could encompass a wide range of online activity, including commentary, satire, and posts on public-interest issues by independent creators and citizens.
According to SFLC.in, these provisions may result in platforms adopting stricter moderation practices, potentially leading to the removal of content without a detailed assessment. It added that smaller platforms and startups could face operational challenges in meeting expanded compliance requirements.
The group further raised objections to the proposed widening of the Inter-Departmental Committee’s remit, suggesting it could allow greater executive involvement in content-related decisions.
On data governance, SFLC.in cautioned that extended data retention requirements may conflict with provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, including the right to erasure. It noted that existing mechanisms under Section 69A of the IT Act already provide a framework for content regulation, and any additional measures should meet established constitutional standards.
