The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted further time to Twitter India to apprise the Court, as to when would it make requisite appointments, in compliance with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, after Twitter India submitted a brief note, filed through its Senior Counsel, stating that it intends to fully comply with the said Rules, and in this regard, though made interim appointments, is taking expeditious steps to appoint Officers on a permanent basis.
The Bench of Justice Rekha Palli was, however, far from impressed on the submission made by Sajan Poovayya, Senior Counsel for Twitter India, referring to the Officers already appointed by Twitter India, in compliance with the Rules as ‘interim’.
“It is made clear that this court has only granted time to Respondent No 2 (Twitter India) to file its affidavit to show compliance of the rules and there is no interim protection granted to the said respondents, it will be open for the Respondent No 1 (Centre) to take action against Twitter India, in accordance with the rules, in case of any breach of the rules,” noted the Court.
The Bench also granted time to other parties to file their response to the affidavit filed by Twitter India.
Mr Poovayya submitted that according to the Rules, three officers are to be appointed, namely a Chief Compliance Officer, a nodal contact person and a Resident Grievance Officer, wherein an interim Chief Compliance Officer has already been appointed on July 6, 2021, an interim nodal contact person would be appointed within two weeks, while an interim Resident Grievance Officer would be appointed by July 11.
He said Twitter India does not have a Liaison Office in India, though it is in the process of setting up the same on a permanent basis. “Therefore, it is unable to put a full-fledged employee by giving a full-fledged address. That’s why the word interim,” said Mr Poovayya.
“The word interim does not, in any manner, take away the responsibility of these Officers under the rules…Permanent appointments being made by Twitter, in the absence of a Liaison Office, may give rise to a permanent establishment of Twitter here, which may lead to tax issues,” he added.
On being inquired as to when the Liaison Office in India would be set up, Mr Poovayya was unable to give a concrete time period. On the issue of interim appointments being made for the time being the Court directed him to state in the response that till permanent appointments are made, the said interim Officers will be responsible in all ways.
On the other hand, G Tushar Rao, Senior Counsel for the petitioner, contended that the word ‘interim’ is misleading, a misnomer of sorts, as it does not attach any permanency and also, the Rules do not talk about any interim arrangement. He further contended that by stating that they are in the process of making appointments or setting up the Liaison Office in India, they are just pushing the implementation.
Chetan Sharma, ASG, pointed out that the note submitted by Twitter states that it has engaged the services of an interim CCO via a third-party contractor. “How does the third party get its genesis from?,” he questioned. He submitted that it is not given in the Rules to transfer the liability on a third party; and that the compliance of the Rules should be followed by that party, which is supposed to comply with it. The matter will be taken up on July 28.
On the last date of hearing, the Court granted time to Mr Poovayya to seek instructions from Twitter India, as to when the appointment of a Resident Grievance Officer in compliance with the IT Rules, 2021, be made.