Journalist bodies at Press Club of India seek withdrawal of Information Technology Rules 2026, warning of censorship risks and threats to press freedom.
Share
DIMAPUR — A coalition of six journalist bodies has mounted a pushback against the proposed amendments to the Information Technology Rules, 2026, demanding their complete withdrawal and warning of a looming threat to press freedom and free speech.
At a joint meeting held at the Press Club of India (PCI) in New Delhi, representatives from PCI, Editors’ Guild of India, DIGIPUB, Indian Women’s Press Corps, Network of Women in Media and the Delhi Union of Journalists voiced “deep concern” over the draft rules, alleging that they could enable sweeping censorship and arbitrary content takedowns.
The PCI issued a press release on Sunday stating that speakers flagged the “extraordinary expansion” of executive powers under Rule 3(4) of the draft, cautioning that overlapping regulations could be used to create a “structure for censorship of news.”
They also cited instances of arbitrary takedowns and shutdowns already affecting journalists’ ability to work.
Also read: Nagaland Police recruitment result expected soon
The meeting adopted a set of resolutions calling on the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to withdraw the draft Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Second Amendment Rules, 2026, in their entirety.
The bodies warned that the proposed compliance framework would disproportionately impact independent journalists, freelancers and digital content creators—especially those running podcasts, newsletters and YouTube channels—terming it “financially terminal” and likely to trigger a “chilling effect” leading to self-censorship.
They further resolved to intensify their campaign against the amendments by engaging Members of Parliament and other stakeholders.
Among other demands, the organisations urged the government to strictly adhere to procedural safeguards under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, as underscored by the Supreme Court in the Shreya Singhal vs Union of India case, including issuing reasoned orders before blocking content.
They also called for withdrawal of delegated blocking powers granted to various agencies, rollback of the recent reduction in takedown timelines from 36 hours to three hours, and scrapping of provisions such as Rule 16 of the IT Rules, 2009, which enable content blocking without accountability.
The meeting additionally demanded an immediate halt to the operation of the Sahyog portal, alleging that it functions without legislative backing and violates due process norms.
Stressing the need for transparency, the bodies maintained that the government must undertake prior consultations with stakeholders, including journalist groups, before drafting laws that could impact press freedom under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.