"It hardly needs to be reiterated that the Constitutional Courts do not come to the aid of litigants whose hands are soiled or who are indolent...no relief can be granted [to Twitter],” the Karnataka High Court ruled while dismissing Twitter's challenge to 39 of the Indian government's blocking orders issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act. While repeatedly spotlighting Twitter's delayed compliance with the blocking orders (recapped here), Justice Krishna S. Dixit held that: Twitter can appear in Indian courts, even as a foreign company; Section 69A allows the government to block accounts, not just tweets; All the orders were issued based on legitimate security reasons; The government doesn't need to inform users of their accounts or tweets being blocked; The government's orders weren't disproportionate, and framing guidelines on issuing Section 69A orders is an Executive task; Twitter engaged in 'frivolous' litigation, "keeping at bay worthier causes of native litigants who were waiting in a militant silence and in a long queue". It is liable to be fined Rs. 50 lakh. Section 69A has been repeatedly criticised for giving the government broad powers to censor content online with little public accountability. Twitter challenged multiple such orders in its petition, including those blocking tweets on the 2021 farmer protests, journalists, and more, for violating free speech rights. The judgment's precedents could enable increased censorship online—which is all the more worrying during a politically-charged election year. By dismissing Twitter's petition, Karnataka HC missed an opportunity to address the core issue:…
