In response to X sharing its written submissions regarding the 2019 Delhi High Court global content blocking order with media outlets, including Bar & Bench, Yoga guru Baba Ramdev expressed disapproval. Ramdev's counsel argued that X should have only shared the submissions with them, not the media. Meanwhile, Facebook's advocate argued that Indian law should prevail over other international jurisdictions, but Ramdev's counsel countered that intermediaries such as X should just remove the content as directed without giving their opinion on the matter.
Baba Ramdev Objects to Twitter Sharing Submissions on Delhi HC Content Blocking Order with Media
Background
In 2019, the Delhi High Court issued a global content blocking order against Twitter, directing the platform to remove certain content related to yoga guru Baba Ramdev. Twitter complied with the order by removing the content within India.
Recent Events
After Twitter shared its written submissions regarding the blocking order with media outlets, Baba Ramdev expressed disapproval. His counsel argued that Twitter should have only shared the submissions with them, not the media.
Meanwhile, Facebook's advocate argued that Indian law should prevail over other international jurisdictions. However, Ramdev's counsel countered that intermediaries such as Twitter should just remove the content as directed without giving their opinion on the matter.
Significance
This case raises important questions about the role of intermediaries in content moderation and the balance between freedom of expression and the right to reputation.
Top 5 FAQs and Answers
What is a content blocking order?
Who issued the content blocking order against Twitter in this case?
What content was ordered to be blocked?
Why did Baba Ramdev object to Twitter sharing the submissions with the media?
What is the argument of Facebook's advocate?
Chaos erupted in the Parliament premises as BJP and opposition MPs clashed over Union Home Minister Amit Shah's comments on Dr BR Ambedkar. Two BJP MPs sustained injuries during the standoff and the party plans to file a police complaint. Congress has demanded an inquiry into the alleged assault by BJP MPs, while also condemning Rahul Gandhi's actions.
A video has emerged on social media showcasing BJP MP Nishikant Dubey aggressively accusing Rahul Gandhi, the leader of Congress party, of hooliganism during the protests over the BR Ambedkar row. He can be seen questioning Gandhi's actions and even calling them out for "gundagardi". This happened after Gandhi approached another injured BJP MP, Pratap Chandra Sarangi, during the protests inside the Parliament premises. The video of this altercation exposes the ongoing tensions and political drama surrounding the issue.
Amidst controversy over Union Home Minister Amit Shah's remarks on BR Ambedkar, the Congress and leaders of the INDIA bloc are holding a nationwide protest for his resignation. This comes after the Congress and its leaders received notices from social media platform X for sharing video clips of Shah violating Indian law. Shiv Sena leader Aditya Thackeray urged the BJP to ask for Shah's resignation, stating that Ambedkar is like God to the people of India.
The Union Home Minister, Amit Shah, has come under fire for his comments on BR Ambedkar during his speech in the Rajya Sabha. The Congress party has accused him of insulting the architect of the Indian Constitution, while the BJP has retaliated, claiming the Opposition party is resorting to cheap tactics. The Home Minister's remarks have sparked a heated political debate, with Congress leaders demanding an apology and a discussion on the issue in Parliament.
In a recent incident in Nagpur, a government official was accused of disrespecting the Indian flag during a public event. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis spoke about the incident, stating that strict action will be taken against those responsible. The incident has sparked controversy and raised questions about patriotism and respect for national symbols. Fadnavis's comments have added fuel to the debate and brought attention to the issue.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi slammed the Congress for denying a portrait of BR Ambedkar in the Parliament's Central Hall. Taking to Twitter, he listed the years of "sins" committed by the Congress against the Dalit leader. This comes after Amit Shah criticized the party for making it a trend to invoke Ambedkar's name, saying they would get a place in heaven if they took God's name as many times.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Indian government has announced the second phase of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY 2.0). With a goal of providing financial support for housing to economically weaker sections and middle-class families in urban areas, this initiative will see the construction of 1 lakh new homes with a financial subsidy of Rs 2.30 lakh for each beneficiary. Eligible individuals can now apply for the scheme through the online portal and track their application status. This move is expected to address the rising housing needs in urban India and provide affordable homes to those in need.
In a heated Winter Session of Parliament, the Congress party is pushing for an apology from Union Home Minister Amit Shah for his recent comments regarding Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. The party's demand has intensified discussions in both the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, with leaders like Rahul Gandhi criticizing the remarks. These debates are expected to be pivotal, reflecting the current political climate and legislative priorities. Additionally, there is a meeting convened by the high-level committee including PM Modi and leaders from opposing parties to discuss the appointment of the NHRC Chairman.
A major controversy has erupted in Mumbai as the Powai police files an FIR against various officials for the demolition of Jai Bhim Nagar settlements. The demolition was recommended by the Bombay High Court and the accused face charges of criminal conspiracy, falsifying documents, and more. Locals, who have been living in the demolished settlement for decades, are now facing the threat of displacement to a remote and disputed settlement, sparking questions about the legality of the rehabilitation offer.