Indian courts' global blocking orders violate sovereignty of other nations: X Corp to Delhi High Court

Social media giant X Corp (earlier known as Twitter) has told the Delhi High Court that Indian courts passing global blocking orders of content on its platforms would violate international law and encroach on the sovereignty of all other nations [Rajat Sharma v X Corp & Ors]..In an affidavit filed before the High Court, X said that it respects India’s rights to enforce its laws within its jurisdiction.But accepting the argument that an Indian court can decide what information people in other countries can see would mean that foreign courts, like the courts of Pakistan and China, could dictate what the citizens of India can or cannot access on the Internet, the reply stated.“Imagine if another country had the power to decide what Indian citizens could or could not see on the Internet. Plaintiff's argument essentially means that the courts of another country, like the courts of Pakistan or China, have the power to dictate what information Indian citizens can or cannot see online,” X Corp has argued.It added,“A direction to remove the posts in all countries - as opposed to restrict the posts in India - would be contrary to international law and the principles of comity of nations… It would extend beyond this Hon’ble Court’s jurisdictional reach, and would encroach upon the sovereignty of all other countries, including the United States, where different legal standards and protections apply.”.The US-based company further argued that the court’s order would not be enforced outside India.“In other words, no useful purpose will be served in passing the orders having international footprints which are otherwise incapable of being enforced globally. For example, under United States federal law, an order to remove these URLs on a global basis would not be enforced by a court in the United States.”It further argued that the Delhi High Court’s earlier decision of geo-blocking of content on social media platforms in Baba Ramdev’s case was erroneous.The Elon Musk-owned company said that in Ramdev’s case, the Court erroneously held that Section 79 of the Information Technology Act is a source of power to order the global removal of content but this section is merely an exemption provision..X Corp made these averments in response to a contempt application moved by journalist Rajat Sharma arguing that despite the High Court’s directions, the social media intermediary only removed defamatory posts against him in India rather than blocking them globally.Sharma had sued Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Jairam Ramesh, and Pawan Khera for defamation after they alleged that Sharma used foul language against Nayak on live television.A single-judge of the High Court had passed an interim order directing the Congress leaders to take down the tweets and if they failed to do so, X Corp and other social media companies were directed to remove those posts.In its response, X Corp has reiterated its claim that Sharma did use foul language against Nayak and that he has committed perjury by now showing the complete video clip of the TV program.