Factcheck! The IT Rules 2021 FAQ
MEITY has published Frequently Asked Questions to ‘bring clarity’ to IT Rules, 21. We separate the Facts from the Claims made in the FAQ document.
MEITY has published Frequently Asked Questions to ‘bring clarity’ to IT Rules, 21. We separate the Facts from the Claims made in the FAQ document.
Supreme Court has appointed a committee of technical experts overseen by Justice R. V. Raveendran, to examine the use of Pegasus Spyware on Indian Citizens.
Madras High Court finds merit in Mr Krishna’s contention that Part II of the Rules violated the right to speech, and held that any action taken under Rule 3 read with Rule 7 shall be subject to the decision in the petition. The Court has also affirmed the previous stay on Rule 9.
The Court found these rules, which prescribed a Code of Ethics and a 3-tier grievance redressal mechanism, to be prima facie violative of Article 19(1)(a) and beyond the rule-making power conferred by the Parliament on the Government.
The Government has filed a limited affidavit before the SC which proposes to constitute a Committee of Experts but does not categorically comment on whether the government used the Pegasus Spyware. The SC has heard submissions on the limited affidavit and has listed the case for 17.08.2021.