Nikhil Bhalla, the advocate petitioning for the creation of a regulatory body for online streaming platforms has reasserted his demand in the rejoinder he filed in the Delhi High Court. Bhalla has demanded for a grievance redressal mechanism and regulation to deal with 'Over-the-top' (OTT) media services providers. (The rejoinder can be read here.) Bhalla said that "reasonable restrictions can be imposed on freedom of speech and expression on the account of public order." This 'public order' is "synonymous with public peace, safety and tranquility." And "anything that disturbs public tranquility or public peace disturbs public order." He was responding to a counter affidavit filed by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY). The Centre, in the affidavit, favored freedom of speech and expression, thereby, putting the onus of content regulation on the Over-the-top (OTT) platforms as per the IT Act, 2000. The Centre has also informed the Delhi High Court about the consultation paper that the TRAI released in November to regulate and define Internet services in India. Delhi HC has listed the matter of hearing on January 30th, 2019. What Bhalla's rejoinder says On December 18, petitioner Nikhil Bhalla submitted the rejoinder in response to the counter affidavit filed by the Centre. His key arguments were: The Ministry of Communication and Information Technology is empowered under the IT Act to block websites and URLs. The petition, thus, denied the Centre's response that puts the onus on disabling access to a link on the intermediary. The Centre has "in fact supported"…
