WhatsApp threatens to exit India: WhatsApp has challenged an Indian government rule that requires the first originator of information to be identified. The company refused to compromise end-to-end encryption, citing privacy rights violations.
The Delhi High Court, on Thursday, heard a WhatsApp plea challenging a provision of the Information Technology Rules 2021 for social media intermediaries requiring them to identify the first author of information before a court or other competent authority.
WhatsApp and its parent company, Facebook Inc, now Meta, refused to comply with the Indian government’s order. Speaking on behalf of WhatsApp, advocate Tejas Karia told a bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora: “As a platform, we are saying, if we are told to break encryption, then WhatsApp goes.” the Delhi High Court said, “Privacy rights were not absolute….balance needs to be done.”
The case will be heard in court on August 14.
WhatsApp vs Centre case
Messaging platforms WhatsApp and Meta have filed petitions against the Indian IT Rules 2021 for social media intermediaries, which require first author credit for information.
WhatsApp and its parent company have challenged IT Rule 4(2) (Digital Media Intermediary Guidelines and Code of Ethics) 2021, which requires “significant social media intermediaries” to identify the first author of information. obliges him to take such measures as may be prescribed by order of the court or other competent authority.
WhatsApp threatens to exit India if forced to break message encryption
WhatsApp has clearly stated that it will not break end-to-end encryption because it violates user privacy.
In its petition to 2021, the Meta-backed company said the Indian government’s mandate to identify the first author of information compromises “end-to-end encryption” and “user privacy”. He said the discoverability provision violated the “fundamental right to privacy”.
WhatsApp has asked the Delhi High Court to declare Rule 4(2) of the Arbitration Rules unconstitutional. It also pleaded that no criminal liability be imposed on it for failing to comply with Section 4(2) of the Rules.
What does the Government of India say?
Combating harmful content such as fake news and hate speech requires identifying the source of the information, the center said.
The government said the law allowed the organizations to create a safer cyberspace and fight “illegal content.”
It said Section 87 of the IT Act empowers them to enact four (2) rules to deal with fake news or seditious materials that threaten national security or social harmony.
