独家
拉维·尚卡尔·普拉萨德(Ravi Shankar Prasad)说，保护用户权利的规则被框框，是因为社交媒体巨头没有这么做
随着社交媒体的新指导方针成为政府与Twitter和WhatsApp在隐私和言论自由问题上摊牌的导火索，IT和法律部长拉维·尚卡尔·普拉萨德一直处于风口上。
给人的印象是政府在扮演社交媒体的保姆。为什么是这样，为什么是这样社交媒体公司生政府的气?
我不同意这个问题。核心问题是这些指导方针并不是突然出现的。首先，最高法院有两项判决——2018年关于儿童色情的普拉杰瓦拉案和2019年9月Facebook诉印度联邦案。在第二个案例中，最高法院表示，有必要建立一个适当的机制来找出这些内容信息的发起者、机构和机构……可能有必要从中介机构获得这些信息。此外，2018年，印度联院(Rajya Sabha)举行了一场关于假新闻的辩论，我不得不承诺制定指导方针。乐动扑克
议会的每届会议都有无数的问题，副总统M Venkaiah Naidu成立了一个议员委员会，就儿童性侵问题提出建议。在目前的指导方针中，我们也进行了尽可能广泛的协商。我们收到了包括利益相关者在内的数百条评论和反评论。因此，请消除我们是保姆的印象。不，我们不是。
这是基于人民的要求、法院的指示和议会及其委员会的命令。如果一个悲痛欲绝的母亲抱怨她的女儿遭受了色情报复，我应该像推特上说的那样让她们去美国吗?如果一位女士抱怨自己的形象变了，那我该怎么办?如今，不仅政治领导人日复一日地遭受批评，记者、编辑、法官甚至商人也会受到攻击。因此，规则的重点更多地是滥用和误用社交媒体，而不是使用社交媒体。虐待的受害者必须有一个讲坛来平反他们的冤屈。这是规则的核心。
那么为什么大型社交媒体公司会出现问题呢?
我们已于二月二十五日在宪报公布新指引，并给予重要中介人三个月的时间遵守指引，包括委任人员遵守指引、处理投诉，以及成为节点人物。我们要月亮了吗?你们是否需要举行upsc类型的IAS考试来招聘这些人员?事实上，他们不应该等待规则的出台。
甚至在纸媒和广播公司也有申诉机制。关于一个更基本的问题:你将在这里赚到大量的钱，在这里获得良好的收益，拥有近两亿Twitter用户，所有平台加起来有近10亿用户。但要投诉，用户需要去警察局或美国，那里的投诉官员的名字甚至都不知道。看来他们在印度只是为了赚钱，而不是为了对印度法律和宪法负责。我想委婉地提醒他们，东印度公司的时代很久以前就结束了。今天的印度是一个主权国家。欢迎他们来印度做生意，帮助我们数百万的用户。
政府讨厌批评吗?
当任何人批评印度时，我们没有任何问题。让他们批评莫迪总理，让他们提问。我们坚信这项权利。但要让遭受虐待的用户发声。我们没钱了。由于他们拒绝这样做，我们不得不启动这一法律程序。
你在和推特打一场硬仗?
我对推特说，你们是一家美国公司，在这里有庞大的用户群。但你没有对你自己的用户给予任何宽容，他们在这里因为虐待而受苦。你凭什么给我们讲民主?印度的民主资历非常、非常好。那里有宪法，有独立的司法，也有强大的媒体。同时，我们对人民负责。他们在这里没有任何正式的办公室，甚至没有提交他们的号码。
为什么他们和其他社交媒体专业人士在三个月内没有遵守指导方针?
他们只是说给我们更多时间。我所能问的是，言论自由是否会成为拖延(新规定)和不遵守的盾牌。它只是一个façade吗?我是带着很大的责任说这些话的。他们可以自由地在印度做生意，赚取利润，扩大用户基础。但他们必须对印度宪法和法律负责。在印度开展业务，但遵守美国法律，这对我们来说显然是不可接受的。
但他们担心不合规的高管会被刑事责任和监禁?
我对这个建议只能一笑置之。他们的官员必须接收用户投诉，然后处理。最后，这个数字需要每月上报给政府。这是所有。只有当你无法确保这一点时，法律才会生效。
移除安全港保护或第三方内容豁免权怎么办?
只有当公司不遵守规则时，安全港才会被移除。如果你有意遵守规则，那就没有问题。我要强调的是，这些规则旨在赋予社交媒体用户权力，而不是让平台受害。这些规定让受虐待的人有了发言权。
他们还要求多长时间?
一些人要求6个月，另一些人要求延长一年。
当Twitter表示它和印度公民社会一样对警方行动和新规定感到担忧时，你认为它和批评你的人是一致的吗?
他们是一个平台还是一个媒体集团?你是一个允许人们分享观点的平台……你将如何采取立场，认为这个想法不符合我的喜好，而这个想法符合我的喜好。当有人破坏国会山时，你会采取强硬行动，但当破坏分子和亲恐怖分子入侵拉尔奎拉时，你不会采取行动。你把拉达克的一部分显示为中国的一部分，我们不得不花两周时间把它移走。当新加坡抗议时，当它与一种(冠状病毒)变体有关时，它的名字就会被删除。在印度，我们得等一个星期。这些双重标准是不可接受的，规范应该是一致的。不愿为用户建立机制是一个令人深感关切的问题。
你会等Twitter多久才会同意?
你应该把它留给管理过程，因为我现在不想分享它。法律已经生效。它不会永远不受惩罚。当然，耐心不是无限的。我希望他们在印度运营，我承认他们给了印度平台用户发言权，用户可以批评总理、我和政府。但是，他们必须遵守国家的规则和法律。
WhatsApp也有自己的问题，并表示他们的消息是加密的，他们已经维持了多年。
WhatsApp的普通用户没有什么好害怕的，这是我明确而明确的保证。这意味着人与人之间的信息传递，医生对他们的病人，律师对他们的客户，记者对他们的消息来源，我们没有任何不满。我不是让印度人生活不舒服的IT部长。我们只寻求有限的信息。只有当一条已经在公众传播的信息引发了暴力、影响了印度的统一和完整、以非常恶劣的方式描绘了一名女性，或者对一名儿童进行了性虐待，并且没有其他侵入性的选择时，WhatsApp才会要求披露是谁发起了骚扰。他们在美国分享，美国和英国首相发表了联合声明。在他们最新的隐私中政策在美国，他们不是说过将与脸书和其他商业实体共享数据吗?隐私会怎样?当facebook与剑桥分析公司共享数据时，隐私是否受到尊重?
我们完全尊重最高法院关于隐私的判决。但恐怖分子、罪犯或腐败分子没有隐私权，否则警方就不可能进行调查。最大的知情权运动者变成了最大的隐私权运动者!隐私是一个人存在的核心要素，即你的医疗记录，你的婚姻关系，性偏好，如果你不是公务员或未成年人，你的收入。我们没有侵犯WhatsApp的任何隐私元素，因为我们正在寻找一条已经传播并导致犯罪的消息的信息。
IT部长拉维·尚卡尔·普拉萨德表示，没有建议任命社交媒体监管机构
今年2月，政府宣布了针对Facebook和Twitter等社交媒体公司以及Netflix等OTT玩家的全面规定，要求他们在36小时内删除任何被当局标记的内容，并建立一个投诉补救机制，并由一名官员驻该国。
WhatsApp提出的一个论点是，每天交换的消息量很大，可能很难保持记录。
难道印度电信运营商和互联网服务提供商没有保存如此庞大的用户记录吗?如果你不打算遵守规则，你有一百个不在场证明。如果你想遵循它，事情就会以一种非常简单的方式落到实处。他们是科技巨头。
如果没有隐私法，在法律上执行这些规定可能吗?
最高法院已经详细讨论了隐私规范。我已经定义了隐私的核心。这些指导方针是在执行IT法案的法定权力时制定的。它们是合理、适度和适当的指导方针。
这是一些平台先发制人的举动，让政府淡化数据保护法的一些条款吗?
我们将在下届议会会议上推动(数据保护)法案。印度是世界上最大的数据产生国之一。因此，我们希望我们的数据保护法能成为保护个人同意权和引导数据良好使用的灯塔。
当任何人批评印度时，我们没有任何问题。让他们批评莫迪总理，让他们问问题。我们坚信这项权利。但要让遭受虐待的用户发声。我们没钱了。由于他们拒绝这样做，我们不得不启动这一法律程序。
我们完全尊重最高法院关于隐私的判决。但恐怖分子、罪犯或腐败分子没有隐私权，否则警方就不可能进行调查。最大的知情权运动者变成了最大的隐私权运动者!
![\"](\"https:\/\/st.etb2bimg.com\/Themes\/Release\/images\/responsive\/ettelecom-default.jpg\")
There is an impression that the government is playing nanny to social media. Why is it so, and why are social media companies<\/a> angry with the government?
<\/strong>
I repudiate this question. The core issue is that these guidelines didn\u2019t spring up suddenly. First, there are two Supreme Court judgements - the Prajwala case of 2018 regarding child pornography and the September 2019 case of Facebook versus the Union of India. In the second case, Supreme Court said that it is imperative that there is a properly-framed regime to find out the persons, institutions, and bodies who are the originators of such content messages\u2026 it may be necessary to get such information from the intermediaries. Also, in 2018, there was a debate in the Rajya Sabha on fake news where I had to give a commitment to frame guidelines.
There have also been countless questions in every session of Parliament, and Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu had set up a committee of parliamentarians that gave recommendations on the issue of child sexual abuse. In the present guidelines too, we went for the widest consultations possible. We got hundreds of comments and counter-comments, including from the stakeholders. Thus, please disabuse the impression that we are nannies. No, we are not.
<\/div><\/div>So why did the guidelines come?
<\/strong>
This is based on the demand of the people, directions of courts, and command of Parliament and its committees. If a distraught mother complains of revenge porn her daughter has been subjected to, should I ask them to go to America as Twitter says. If a woman complains of a morphed image, then what should I do? Today, it is not only political leaders who suffer criticism day in and day out, but also journalists, editors, judges and even businessmen who are trolled. Thus, focus of the rules is more on abuse and misuse of social media, not of use of social media. Victims of abuse must have a forum for redressal of their grievances. That\u2019s the main core of the rules.
Then why was there a problem with big social media companies?
<\/strong>
On February 25, we notified the new guidelines in the gazette, and gave the significant intermediaries a three-month period to comply, which included appointing officers for compliance, addressing grievances, and being a nodal person. Did we ask for the moon? Do you need to hold a UPSC-type IAS exam to recruit these officers? In fact, they ought not have waited for the rules.
Grievance redress mechanism is there even in the print media, and broadcasters. On a more fundamental question: You will earn tons of money here, make good revenues here, have close to two crore Twitter users and nearly 100 crore between all the platforms combined. But to file a complaint, a user needs to go to the police or go to America where the name of the grievance officer is not even known. It seems they are in India only to earn money and not to be accountable to the Indian laws and constitution. I want to gently remind them that the days of East India Company are over a long time ago. India today is a sovereign country. They are welcome to do business in India, and help in the empowerment of our millions of users.
<\/strong>
This is based on the demand of the people, directions of courts, and command of Parliament and its committees. If a distraught mother complains of revenge porn her daughter has been subjected to, should I ask them to go to America as Twitter says. If a woman complains of a morphed image, then what should I do? Today, it is not only political leaders who suffer criticism day in and day out, but also journalists, editors, judges and even businessmen who are trolled. Thus, focus of the rules is more on abuse and misuse of social media, not of use of social media. Victims of abuse must have a forum for redressal of their grievances. That\u2019s the main core of the rules.
Then why was there a problem with big social media companies?
<\/strong>
On February 25, we notified the new guidelines in the gazette, and gave the significant intermediaries a three-month period to comply, which included appointing officers for compliance, addressing grievances, and being a nodal person. Did we ask for the moon? Do you need to hold a UPSC-type IAS exam to recruit these officers? In fact, they ought not have waited for the rules.
Grievance redress mechanism is there even in the print media, and broadcasters. On a more fundamental question: You will earn tons of money here, make good revenues here, have close to two crore Twitter users and nearly 100 crore between all the platforms combined. But to file a complaint, a user needs to go to the police or go to America where the name of the grievance officer is not even known. It seems they are in India only to earn money and not to be accountable to the Indian laws and constitution. I want to gently remind them that the days of East India Company are over a long time ago. India today is a sovereign country. They are welcome to do business in India, and help in the empowerment of our millions of users.
<\/div><\/div>
Is the government averse to criticism?
<\/strong>
We don\u2019t have any issue when anyone criticizes the government of India. Let them criticize Prime Minister Naredra Modi, let them ask questions. We firmly believe in that right. But give a voice to the users who are subject of abuse. We are out of it. Because of their refusal to do so, we have been constrained to initiate this legal process.
You are having a pitched battle with Twitter?
<\/strong>
I say to Twitter that you are an American company, and you have a huge user base here. But you are not giving any indulgence to your own users who are suffering here because of abuse. Who are you to give us a lecture on democracy? India\u2019s democratic credentials are very, very well placed. The Constitution is there, an independent judiciary is there, and a robust media also. Also, we are accountable to the people. They do not have any proper office here and do not even submit their numbers here.
Why did they and other social media majors not comply with guidelines within three months?
<\/strong>
They just said that give us more time. All I can ask is whether freedom of speech bogey is a shield to delay (the new rules), and not to obey. Is it just a fa\u00e7ade? I am saying this with a lot of responsibility. They are free to do business in India, earn profit, and enhance their user base. But they have to be accountable to the Constitution and laws of India. Having operations in India, but following the laws of America is plainly unacceptable to us.
But they are worried about criminal liability and jail for their executives for non-compliance?
<\/strong>
I can only laugh at this suggestion. Their officer has to receive user complaint and thereafter dispose it off. Finally, this number need to be reported to the government every month. That\u2019s all. The law kicks in only when you fail to ensure this.
What about removal of safe harbour protection, or immunity from third-party content?
<\/strong>
Safe harbour gets removed only when the company doesn\u2019t follow rules. If you have intentions to follow the rules, then there is no problem. Let me say emphatically that these rules are designed to empower users of social media, and are not meant to victimize the platforms. The rules give a voice to the victims of abuse.
How much more time are they asking for?
<\/strong>
Some are asking for six months, other seek an extension of one year.
Do you think Twitter has aligned with your critics when it says it shares the concerns of civil society in India over police action and the new rules?
<\/strong>
Are they a platform or a media group? You are a platform where you allow people to share views\u2026how will you take a position that this idea is not to my liking but this (one) is. You take tough action when there is vandalism on Capitol Hill but when vandals and pro-terrorist elements invade Lal Quila, you don\u2019t act. You show a part of Ladakh as part of China and we have to try for a fortnight to get it removed. When Singapore protests, its name is taken down when it is related to a (Coronavirus) variant. In India, we have to wait for a week. These double standard are not acceptable, the norms should be the same. This reluctance to have a mechanism for the users is a matter of deep concern.
How long will you wait for Twitter to comply?
<\/strong>
You should leave it to the governing process as I don\u2019t want to share it now. The law has already kicked in. It will not go indefinitely unpunished. Certainly, patience is not infinite. I want them to operate in India, I acknowledge that they have given a voice to the users of their platform in India and users can criticise the Prime Minister, me and the government. But, they have to follow the rules and laws of the country.
WhatsApp has its own issues and says that their messages are encrypted, something that they have maintained for years.
<\/strong>
Ordinary users of WhatsApp have nothing to fear, and that\u2019s a clear and categorical assurance from me. This means people-to-people messaging, doctors to their patients, lawyers to their clients, journalists to their sources, we have no grievance. I am not the IT minister to make the life of Indians uncomfortable. We are seeking only limited information. Only when a message already in public circulation is giving rise to violence, impinging on the unity and integrity of India, depicting a woman in a very bad light, or sexual abuse of a child, and when no other intrusive options are working, only then WhatsApp will require to disclose who started the nuisance. They are sharing it in the US, there was a joint statement by the Americans, the British PM. In their latest privacy policy<\/a>, haven\u2019t they said that they will share data with Facebook and other business entities? What happens to privacy? When FB shared data with Cambridge Analytica, was privacy respected?
We fully respect Supreme Court judgment on privacy. But a terrorist, or a criminal or a corrupt person does not have Right to Privacy otherwise no police investigation is possible. The biggest campaigners of Right to Information have become the biggest campaigners of Right to Privacy! Privacy is the core element of an individual\u2019s existence, namely your medical records, your matrimonial relationship, sexual preferences, your income if you are not a public servant or a minor. We are not invading any element of privacy of WhatsApp when we are seeking information on a message that is already in circulation that resulted in an offence.
Is the government averse to criticism?
<\/strong>
We don\u2019t have any issue when anyone criticizes the government of India. Let them criticize Prime Minister Naredra Modi, let them ask questions. We firmly believe in that right. But give a voice to the users who are subject of abuse. We are out of it. Because of their refusal to do so, we have been constrained to initiate this legal process.
You are having a pitched battle with Twitter?
<\/strong>
I say to Twitter that you are an American company, and you have a huge user base here. But you are not giving any indulgence to your own users who are suffering here because of abuse. Who are you to give us a lecture on democracy? India\u2019s democratic credentials are very, very well placed. The Constitution is there, an independent judiciary is there, and a robust media also. Also, we are accountable to the people. They do not have any proper office here and do not even submit their numbers here.
Why did they and other social media majors not comply with guidelines within three months?
<\/strong>
They just said that give us more time. All I can ask is whether freedom of speech bogey is a shield to delay (the new rules), and not to obey. Is it just a fa\u00e7ade? I am saying this with a lot of responsibility. They are free to do business in India, earn profit, and enhance their user base. But they have to be accountable to the Constitution and laws of India. Having operations in India, but following the laws of America is plainly unacceptable to us.
But they are worried about criminal liability and jail for their executives for non-compliance?
<\/strong>
I can only laugh at this suggestion. Their officer has to receive user complaint and thereafter dispose it off. Finally, this number need to be reported to the government every month. That\u2019s all. The law kicks in only when you fail to ensure this.
What about removal of safe harbour protection, or immunity from third-party content?
<\/strong>
Safe harbour gets removed only when the company doesn\u2019t follow rules. If you have intentions to follow the rules, then there is no problem. Let me say emphatically that these rules are designed to empower users of social media, and are not meant to victimize the platforms. The rules give a voice to the victims of abuse.
How much more time are they asking for?
<\/strong>
Some are asking for six months, other seek an extension of one year.
Do you think Twitter has aligned with your critics when it says it shares the concerns of civil society in India over police action and the new rules?
<\/strong>
Are they a platform or a media group? You are a platform where you allow people to share views\u2026how will you take a position that this idea is not to my liking but this (one) is. You take tough action when there is vandalism on Capitol Hill but when vandals and pro-terrorist elements invade Lal Quila, you don\u2019t act. You show a part of Ladakh as part of China and we have to try for a fortnight to get it removed. When Singapore protests, its name is taken down when it is related to a (Coronavirus) variant. In India, we have to wait for a week. These double standard are not acceptable, the norms should be the same. This reluctance to have a mechanism for the users is a matter of deep concern.
How long will you wait for Twitter to comply?
<\/strong>
You should leave it to the governing process as I don\u2019t want to share it now. The law has already kicked in. It will not go indefinitely unpunished. Certainly, patience is not infinite. I want them to operate in India, I acknowledge that they have given a voice to the users of their platform in India and users can criticise the Prime Minister, me and the government. But, they have to follow the rules and laws of the country.
WhatsApp has its own issues and says that their messages are encrypted, something that they have maintained for years.
<\/strong>
Ordinary users of WhatsApp have nothing to fear, and that\u2019s a clear and categorical assurance from me. This means people-to-people messaging, doctors to their patients, lawyers to their clients, journalists to their sources, we have no grievance. I am not the IT minister to make the life of Indians uncomfortable. We are seeking only limited information. Only when a message already in public circulation is giving rise to violence, impinging on the unity and integrity of India, depicting a woman in a very bad light, or sexual abuse of a child, and when no other intrusive options are working, only then WhatsApp will require to disclose who started the nuisance. They are sharing it in the US, there was a joint statement by the Americans, the British PM. In their latest privacy policy<\/a>, haven\u2019t they said that they will share data with Facebook and other business entities? What happens to privacy? When FB shared data with Cambridge Analytica, was privacy respected?
We fully respect Supreme Court judgment on privacy. But a terrorist, or a criminal or a corrupt person does not have Right to Privacy otherwise no police investigation is possible. The biggest campaigners of Right to Information have become the biggest campaigners of Right to Privacy! Privacy is the core element of an individual\u2019s existence, namely your medical records, your matrimonial relationship, sexual preferences, your income if you are not a public servant or a minor. We are not invading any element of privacy of WhatsApp when we are seeking information on a message that is already in circulation that resulted in an offence.