Read more
Facebook India refuses to appear before Delhi Legislative Assembly Committee, tells Supreme Court Facebook is being shown as part of unwarranted violence
 |
| Facebook India Unwilling to participate before Dellhi Legislative Assembly,Tells Suprime Court |
New Delhi:
The Delhi Assembly Secretary told the Supreme Court that Facebook's representative in the parliamentary committee could not be chosen or rejected as a witness before a panel on peace and harmony, examining the role of social (2020) media giants in the Delhi riots.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari on Wednesday accepted the petition filed jointly by Facebook Inc.
 |
| Facebook Vs Suprime court Comettie conflict,Hate speech and Riot related case-representative image |
Mohammad was summoned on September 18 by a panel of the Delhi Legislative Assembly headed by Raghav Chadha to ensure that he did not violate the rules of the summons committee. He was earlier summoned on September 10
[See Also-The RBI has called on the SC to suspend the NPA split]
The move comes after the Wall Street Journal published an article on August 14 entitled "Facebook's Hate-Speech Rules Conflict with Indian Politics."
In a writ petition, he argued that the committee compelled the witness to testify in relation to "public order" and "police" and "communications", which are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the central government. .
On September 2, the head of Facebook's India branch appeared before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Facebook Information Technology and argued for "special emphasis on protecting citizens' rights and protecting women in digital as well as preventing the misuse of social / online news media platforms."
The petition cites "summons by the Delhi Legislative Assembly Committee as unconstitutional as they seek to compel non-members to testify on matters relating to" disruption of peace and harmony throughout the NCT of Delhi ". Central Government in accordance with paragraph ".
The petition also said that he was not even given the constitutional right to remain silent and instead Facebook was being forced to file a statement against itself in response to the committee's statement that it was involved in the Delhi riots.
"This is against the law, unavoidable and a gross violation of due process and fundamental rights under Articles 19 (1 (a) and 21 of the Constitution," "he said in a statement.
Among other reasons, the petition states that targeting a platform used for communication is a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. .
 |
| Facebook hate speech or riot spreding issues of 2020 |
The petition raises critical questions about the constitutional jurisdiction between the right to freedom of speech and expression and the power and privileges of members of the legislature, which have already been referred to a seven-judge bench, including N. Robbie. And Others v. Speakers, Legislature, Chennai (2005).
Prior to the summons, the chairman of the panel said in the petition that "Facebook should be treated as a co-accused" in the August 31 riots in Delhi and that a Facebook
0 Reviews
Don't allow spam link