Supreme Court issues notice in PUCL's application seeking directions against continued enforcement of Section 66A. IFF provided legal assistance to PUCL.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare has recently signed 4 more MoUs regarding the Agristack with Patanjali Organic Research Institute, ESRI India Technologies, Amazon Web Services, and Star Agribazaar. Here, we analyse these MoUs, and explain what they mean for Indian agriculture.
Draft Model Rules for Live-Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings were released by the Supreme Court’s e-Committee. IFF submitted its comments to the Draft Rules welcoming the Rules, and suggesting that the Rules can strike a better balance between privacy and public interest.
In May 2021 the Government of J&K suspended internet services on three occasions, without promptly publishing suspensions orders. Foundation of Media Professionals has addressed a legal notice to the Government of J&K asking them to comply with directions of the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin.
Twitter unilaterally and arbitrarily suspended the account of Sushant Singh (@sushant_says) twice. He sent a formal representation to Twitter highlighting issues with Twitter’s policies and actions, relating to transparency, free expression and consistency, and urged an open dialogue on its policy.
The e-Committee has released draft rules for live streaming of all proceedings in all courts. We strongly welcome this step, and offer small changes which can further improve the Rules.
Madras High issued notice on a writ petition by T.M. Krishna challenging the Intermediary Rules 2021.
Delhi High Court issued a series of directions offered by the Amicus, Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao on a note prepared by IFF. Hopefully it will soon lead to massive improvements including alternate modes or registration, co-win becoming more accessible, multilingual and having a privacy policy.
Hyderabad Police is forcing people to remove masks and photographing them. We sent a legal notice to the Police Commissioner about this.
CIC directed the CPIO to re-visit our original RTI and provide a revised reply and info, if (comments on consultation on PDPB). However, the CPIO simply cited the same exemption under S.8 of the RTI Act that she had provided before the CIC.