WhatsApp Assures Delhi High Court: Exiting India, Upholding User Privacy, No Compromise

WhatsApp Assures Delhi High Court: Exiting India, Upholding User Privacy, No Compromise
WhatsApp Assures Delhi High Court: Exiting India, Upholding User Privacy, No Compromise
WhatsApp Assures Delhi High Court: Exiting India, Upholding User Privacy, No Compromise

New Delhi , 27 April : WhatsApp informed the Delhi High Court on Thursday that it would exit India if compelled to compromise message and call encryption under the 2021 Information Technology Rules.
This challenge by the company comes against the backdrop of the rules allowing the government to request social media platforms to decrypt messages and identify the original sender.
During the hearing of the plea filed by WhatsApp and its parent company Meta, contesting a provision of the IT Rules mandating social media firms to disclose the initial sender of information, the company argued against Rule 4(2) of the 2021 IT Rules.
This rule stipulates that major social media companies must facilitate the identification of the first sender of information.
WhatsApp contended before the court that these rules infringe upon users’ fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution, which pertain to equality before the law, freedom of speech, and protection of life and personal liberty, respectively.
The counsel representing WhatsApp reiterated the platform’s stance, stating, “If we are instructed to compromise encryption, WhatsApp will withdraw.” The company emphasized the global uniqueness of such a rule, emphasizing that WhatsApp’s encryption is a key factor driving its usage.
WhatsApp raised concerns regarding the practical implications of implementing the rule, highlighting the need to store vast amounts of data for an indefinite period to comply with decryption requests.
Under the government’s rule, social media companies are required to disclose the original sender of information for serious offenses, subject to a court order or authorization from a competent authority, as outlined in the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for interception, monitoring, and decryption of information) Rules, 2009.
The company emphasized the delicate balance between privacy rights and the government’s need for information, particularly in cases involving national security threats. The court has scheduled further proceedings on August 14 to address the matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvCTwjMXKOs