21 Indian news publishers have challenged India’s data privacy law in the Supreme Court, citing concerns over press freedom, investigative journalism and the protection of confidential sources.
A group of 21 news publishers have challenged the privacy law in the Supreme Court, arguing it would trample investigative work and expose confidential sources, Reuters reported, citing court documents. The top court will hear the challenge to Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 filed by Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) on Tuesday. The news outlets also include businesses headed by Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani.
Media companies received assurances in an August meeting with the government that the law would protect press freedom, but not having a written carve-out for journalists like in the European Union, Singapore and Britain was alarming, India’s Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) said in a confidential filing at the Supreme Court, reviewed by Reuters.
DNPA’s members include Network18, which has seven digital news platforms, NDTV and other marquee media groups including the Indian Express and Times Internet, which is part of the Times of India group, publisher of India’s largest-selling English-language daily.
These 21 News Publishers are:
- Lokmat
- Business Standard
- The Indian Express
- Zee News
- Dainik Jagran
- Eenadu
- ABP Group
- India TV
- Mathrubhumi
- Malayala Manorama
- India Today
- The Hindu
- Dainik Bhaskar
- Network18
- Times Internet
- HT Digital
- NDTV
- The New Indian Express
- The Mysore Printers
- ABP
- Jagran New Media
According to the report, the publishers have demanded that most of the law’s contentious provisions, which kick in from May 2027, should be quashed.
The law would “render investigative journalism a benign and neutered recorder of events,” the 698-page filing said. The provisions “constitute pre-censorship which is anathema to any democracy worth its name”.
A social media platform or online retailer can seek consent from users when they sign up, but the DNPA has argued that requiring a journalist to notify the subject of an investigation and seek consent “would allow that subject to destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses”.
The law also lets people withdraw consent at any time and demand that their data be erased, without any public-interest safeguard, which DNPA says could force its members to unpublish or heavily redact a factual news report.
The publishers are also concerned that a federal authority created could also impose fines for non-compliance, and grants powers to authorities to block access to any information in the “interests of the general public”, which would curtail press freedom, DNPA said.
