MeitY set to notify portion of IT Rules for stricter compliances

India's Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) is preparing to issue a separate notification regarding a proposed rule that would compel digital intermediaries to adhere to the ministry's advisories, directions, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and guidelines, or face potential legal consequences. This move comes amid ongoing revisions to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, which have drawn considerable attention from both regulators and industry stakeholders. The proposed changes include Rule 3(4), one of several amendments to the IT Rules that were made available for public consultation on March 30. An additional amendment was later included on April 21. According to a government official, the decision to issue a standalone notification stems from the need to ensure early compliance with these directives. Another factor behind this step involves ongoing discussions with the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) concerning further modifications to the rules. These discussions involve expanding the authority of the Inter-Departmental Committee (IDC) under Rule 14(2) and placing user-generated content related to news and current affairs, such as community notes on X, under MIB’s jurisdiction via Rule 8(1). At least three meetings between MeitY and MIB had been planned starting in May, though they were eventually postponed. Industry representatives have raised concerns about the proposed amendments, suggesting that intermediaries are already subject to regulation under Section 79 of the IT Act. They argue that the new measures would impose an extra layer of oversight, potentially increasing liability for intermediaries and causing confusion in business operations. Rule 3(4) falls under the due diligence requirements outlined in Section 79 of the IT Act. If intermediaries fail to follow government advisories, they could lose their safe-harbour protection. Major social media companies' representative groups have urged the withdrawal of this rule, fearing it might transform government advisories into enforceable obligations linked to safe harbours, thereby broadening intermediary liability and generating uncertainty for businesses. A government official mentioned that MeitY aims to avoid repeating past compliance problems with X, particularly those involving its AI chatbot Grok. Earlier this year, MeitY sent a stern letter to X highlighting serious lapses in preventing the creation of inappropriate and sexually explicit content through Grok. In addition, MeitY intends to publish a schedule outlining which government advisories will be mandatory for intermediaries to follow under Rule 3(4). This schedule will differentiate between advisories that are binding and those issued in response to particular issues. Another amendment suggests continuous visible labeling of AI-generated content under Rule 3(3)(a)(ii), a measure that has also encountered resistance from the industry. Despite this, the IT ministry maintains its stance, asserting that the proposed change should not be weakened due to poor adherence by social media platforms to current AI-content labeling mandates. Dhruv Garg, a partner at the policy advisory firm Indian Governance and Policy Project (IGAP), emphasized that under Indian law, delegated legislation derives its authority exclusively from the parent statute. He noted that subordinate regulations must align strictly with the provisions of the parent Act and cannot introduce new liabilities or circumvent legislative oversight. Regardless of how they are labeled, such instruments must conform to the rule-making processes and powers defined by the Act.