Centre explores legal safe harbour review for social media platforms amid accountability push

NEW DELHI — The Centre has begun preliminary, exploratory discussions regarding whether major social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and X should continue to enjoy “safe harbour” legal protections from liability for third-party content posted by their users.

According to The Indian Express, the deliberations remain at an early stage, and no formal legislative proposal or final decision has been reached regarding the withdrawal of these protections. The discussions focus on whether platforms utilizing algorithms and content curation systems can still be classified as passive intermediaries.

Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 has historically provided conditional immunity to internet intermediaries from legal liability arising from third-party information transmitted or published on their networks, subject to due diligence requirements. In its landmark 2015 Shreya Singhal judgment, the Supreme Court clarified that the obligation to remove unlawful content under Section 79(3)(b) must be linked directly to a court order or appropriate government notification.

The current debate has been accelerated by growing concerns over online harms, digital arrest scams, and specific content moderation disputes. In August, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) submitted a status report before the Supreme Court during proceedings concerning digital arrest scams, with records indicating that the government was examining a review of safe harbour protections.

Friction between the government and tech companies has also flared over operational actions. In July, Facebook temporarily withheld a video posted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during nationwide student protests. The incident prompted the IT Ministry to summon senior Meta executives, including Joel Kaplan. Subsequently, in August, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey called for action against Meta and warned that safe harbour protections could be rescinded.

Judicial scrutiny has further highlighted the issue. In an October 15 order concerning online child sexual abuse material, the Supreme Court questioned the adequacy of the existing framework under Section 79, stating a preference for proportionate penalties while viewing the withdrawal of safe harbour as an exceptional measure.

IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw did not conclusively confirm or deny whether the government intended to withdraw safe harbour protections, but emphasized that platforms must bear greater accountability. “Today, social media platforms must take the responsibility for child safety, for women’s safety, for digital arrest, for the harms which come to the citizens… social media platforms must take proactive steps,” he stated.

Civil society organizations have raised concerns over the potential policy shift. The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) warned that weakening intermediary immunity would create a chilling effect on freedom of expression, noting that safe harbour acts as the legal foundation that allows ordinary citizens to speak online without preemptive platform censorship driven by legal risk.