Moot Proposition

S E C O N D E D I T I O N
CNLU CYBER LAW

NATIONAL
MOOT COURT COMPETITION
Supported By

Knowledge Partners
MOOT PROPOSITION
[¶1] The Republic of Intia is extremely diverse and has an enormous population size.
Inspite of a stark digital divide persisting in the country, cheap access to internet has
enabled the citizens of Intia [across all ages] to use and spend a major chunk of their
daily time using the internet and social media.
[¶1] The Republic of Intia is extremely diverse and has an enormous population size.
Inspite of a stark digital divide persisting in the country, cheap access to internet has
enabled the citizens of Intia [across all ages] to use and spend a major chunk of their
daily time using the internet and social media.
[¶3] One of the most important features of WhereApp is the use of end-to-end encryption
technology, which ensures complete privacy of its users’ and helps in keeping the
exchange of messages between two or more people secure and private. Intia’s Ministry of
Technology (“MoT”) in exercise of the powers conferred under the appropriate sections
of its Information Technology Act, enacted the Information Technology (Intermediary
Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2022 (“IT Rules”) in May 2022. Soon
after the enactment, the IT Rules received a severe backlash due to its mandate of
requiring online-communication applications like WhereApp to help in the identification
of ‘first-originator’ of information after receiving ‘appropriate orders’.
[¶4] Ms Hermoine, a social activist immediately approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of Intia, citing various provisions of the IT Rules “problematic for people’s privacy”.
WhereApp also released an official statement, clearly highlighting that adherence to the
mandate under IT Rules will lead to a compromise in people’s right to free speech and
privacy. MoT responded and strongly rebutted this statement and said- “WhereApp’s
statement is an attempt to dictate terms to the world’s largest democracy. Through its
actions and deliberate defiance, WhereApp seeks to undermine Intia’s legal system.
Furthermore, WhereApp is refusing to comply with the very regulations in the
intermediary guidelines on the basis of which it claims safe harbour protection from any
criminal liability in Intia.”
[¶5] While the IT Rules debate was ongoing, the State of Intia enacted their new
Telecommunications Act [hereinafter, “The Act”] with an aim to consolidate and amend
the laws governing provision, development, expansion and operation of
telecommunication services, telecommunication networks and telecommunication
infrastructure and assignment of spectrum, etc. There was a lot of hue and cry by digital
rights organisations and non-profit organisations concerning Section 24(2) of The Act
which states:
2ND CNLU CYBER LAW NATIONAL MOOT COURT PAGE 6

COMPETITION 2023
On the occurrence of any public emergency or in the interest of the public safety, the
Central Government or a State Government or any officer specially authorized in this
behalf by the Central or a State Government, may, if satisfied that it is necessary or
expedient to do so, in the interest of the sovereignty, integrity or security of Intia, friendly
relations with foreign states, public order, or preventing incitement to an offence, for
reasons to be recorded in writing, by order:
(a)direct that any message or class of messages, to or from any person or class of
persons, or relating to any particular subject, brought for transmission by, or transmitted
or received by any telecommunication services or telecommunication network, shall not
be transmitted, or shall be intercepted or detained or disclosed to the officer mentioned in
such order;
(b)direct that communications or class of communications to or from any person or class
of persons, or relating to any particular subject, transmitted or received by any
telecommunication network shall be suspended.
[¶6] The Act which aims to unify and repeal several old statutes, now explicitly broadened
the definition of ‘telecommunication services’, and included ‘Over-the-top (OTT)’ and
‘internet-based communication services’ as well.
[¶7] Mr Harry, Founder of Humara Internet Foundation, working towards protecting digital
rights of the citizens, filed a petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Intia citing
Section 24(2) of The Act as unconstitutional in its present form. Mr Harry during an
address to a media house said- “The new Telecommunications Act is an attack on end-to-
end encryption and the protection of fundamental rights of people and miserably fails to
adhere to the internationally recognised privacy principles endorsed by the Hon’ble Apex
Court of Intia in its landmark judgment.” His stand garnered support from a wealth of
digital rights organisations and people, and soon became a hot topic of discussion for the
prime-time debates.
[¶8] Responding to the statement made by Mr Harry, the Department of

Telecommunications (“DoT”) states- “Evidence suggests that the use of Darknet and end-
to-end encrypted messaging platforms have become a haven for terrorists. Therefore we
need to have strong measures in place for effective surveillance and tracking of such anti-
social elements. The government is not asking for access through an unsecured backdoor
but instead is requesting for the digital equivalent of a secured fortified ‘front door’ with
locks and bars.”
[¶9] Since Ms Hermoine’s petition was sub judice, the Hon’ble Apex Court was of the view
that both the petitions involved similar set of question of facts and question of laws and
therefore clubbed the petitions for a combined hearing on January 27, 2023. The Hon’ble
Court framed the following issues and directed that unless compelling reasons are shown
no further issues shall be taken up for hearing

COMPETITION 2023
1.Whether the petitions under Article 32 maintainable?
2.Whether the relevant provisions made under IT Rules and Telecommunications Act, ultra
vires to the Constitution of Intia?
3.Whether the provisions under the IT Rules and Telecommunications Act are in
commensurate with the Government of Intia’s policy on Telecommunications and
Information Technology?
NOTES:
1.All names, characters, places and incidents above are entirely fictional with
resemblance to any real-life equivalent being coincidental at best, mistaken at worst.
2.Republic of Intia is a fictitious country with a Constitution and laws in pari materia with
that of Republic of India.

COMPETITION 2023

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S E C O N D E D I T I O N

CNLU CYBER LAW

2ND CNLU CYBER LAW NATIONAL MOOT COURT PAGE 6

[¶8] Responding to the statement made by Mr Harry, the Department of

2ND CNLU CYBER LAW NATIONAL MOOT COURT PAGE 6

2ND CNLU CYBER LAW NATIONAL MOOT COURT PAGE 7

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.