Friday, March 29, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Delhi High Court issues notice in Sanjay Hegde’s Twitter Account suspension case

The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice in the plea filed by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde challenging the suspension of his Twitter account.

Justice Navin Chawla issued the notice to the Centre, listing the matter for further hearing on February 11. Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, appearing for Hegde, vouched for the maintainability of the writ petition. It was submitted that a division bench judgment of the High Court can be filed against non-state actors for violation of Article 19 of the Constitution.

Standing Counsel Kirtiman Singh, appearing for the respondent, informed the Court there were already guidelines on the point of censorship on social media.

On October 26, 2019, Twitter suspended the account of senior advocate Sanjay Hegde for putting up the famous photo of August Landmesser refusing to do the Nazi salute in a sea of a crowd in the Blohm Voss shipyard which as per him has been for long been his cover picture.

Despite the picture being around for decades, according to the social media platform, the image violated Twitter’s ‘hateful imagery’ guidelines. Twitter briefly revoked the suspension following a massive virtual uproar in Hegde’s favour but promptly re-suspended Hegde’s account again.

Social media platforms, owing to the enormous concentration of power and opaque moderating policies, have become the gatekeepers of online speech to a large extent. If such power is left unchecked, then, as Hegde’s request demonstrates, a citizen’s free speech rights are meaningless. The petition also states that arbitrary ‘take-downs’ or suspensions, by social media accounts, have a chilling effect on free speech. The petition strongly contends that Twitter serves as a medium for citizens including the Petitioner to communicate their grievances and concerns with elected officials and government representatives. It serves as the “marketplace of ideas”. It, therefore, performs a public function and is amenable to the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226, as argued before the Court on a previous date.

— India Legal Bureau

spot_img

News Update