The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice to Meta Inc., the parent company of Social media platform Facebook on a petition moved by BJP's Tamil Nadu spokesperson SG Suryah against the access restriction and demonetisation of Facebook Page.
The petition said these actions were taken without providing an opportunity to the petitioner to be heard.
Justice V Kameswar Rao issued the notices to Meta Inc and Central Government to file a reply on 30 March 2022. Notice has also been issued in another identical petition moved by Karan Pratap Khosla. Three other petitions on a similar issue are already listed for the next date.
Suryah has moved a petition through Advocate Mukesh Sharma. It was alleged that in December 2021 the two Facebook Posts posted containing Youtube videos were marked as community Standard Violation and thereafter the Petitioner's Facebook Page was restricted for a month with several limitations along with a disclaimer of 'Risk of my Facebook Page getting unpublished.'
The petition also alleged that the Petitioner's page was demonetised and as soon as he came to know this, he once again approached the respondent explaining the latter as to how he was first barred for a month and then how his page's reach was restricted and finally demonetised.
Advocate Raghav Avasthi, counsel for the petitioner, argued that Petitioner's page has been restricted for a month after posting a YouTube video. The said video pertains to Anti-LTTE speed made by a Jnanpith and Sahitya Akademi Awardee late Tamil writer Jayakanthan.
The Counsel argued that unfortunately, the respondent meta inc marked these two posts as 'Pro-LTTE". The respondent mis-interpreted the contents of those posts which were posted in the Tamil Language and took a wrongful decision by restricting the petitioner's reach to the public at large. This was done without even affording any opportunity of hearing to him.
Advocate Avasthi further submitted that the petitioner's page was demonetised on 4 January 22, then the petitioners again approached Meta Inc.
He further submitted that the Meta performs a public function and also enjoys a virtual duopoly when it comes to the dissemination of information at the behest of the central Government. It is regulated by the Central Government by means of Section 79 of the Information Technology Act 2000 apart from the Information Technology ( Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021.
Petitioner's Counsel further said the aforesaid action is violative of various provisions of the Constitution of India including Articles 14,19 and 21. There is no provision under which content can be edited or modified before transmission suo-motu by an intermediary like the respondent company.
( With inputs from ANI )
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor