We've been left on read : Lack of response from BSNL and DOT on Net Neutrality violations. #SaveTheInternet

With no response from the DOT and BSNL on continuing net neutrality violations, IFF has approached the issue with a three-pronged move.

29 July, 2019
2 min read


  • Background: Armed with publicly sourced complaints, IFF approached the Department of Telecommunications on the continuing net neutrality violations and BSNL on insertions of code injections. However, there has been pin drop silence on their part so far.
  • Need for an action:  The lack of a mechanism in place to provide redressal or cooperation from BSNL has led us to take a forward a three-pronged action approach.


Referring to our previous correspondence on 29.05.2019 with Ref. No. IFF/2019/112 (Read here), and on 27.03.2019 with Ref. No. IFF/2019/107 (Read here), various complaints received by us have been documented in the representations indicating net neutrality violations through summaries of reports received along with an anonymised document of the various complaints of violations. In addition, our representation to BSNL with Ref. No. IFF/2019/110 has also specifically disclosed the occurrences of code injections inserted into non-https websites (Read here). To combat atrophy, we have have deployed a combination three step move.

Three-Pronged move to get a response

Step One: RTI with BSNL

Having provided various crowd sourced complaints of such browser/code injections against BSNL along with our representation, we received no response. As a result, we filed an RTI with Ref. No. BSNLD/R/2019/50935 has also been filed with BSNL for information on its use of code injections. We have requested for copies of action taken to our complaint and any other complaints it has received and reasons if there has been no action taken as well.

Step Two: RTI and Complaint to the Department of Telecommunications

In addition to our previous representations, we have once again written to the DOT once again, firstly, providing clarity on how code injections are a violation of  the Unified Licenses that govern ISPs and secondly, on its lack of response and need for action (Read here for more). Additionally, an RTI with Ref. No. DOTEL/R/2019/50637 has also been filed with the DOT on action taken in response to our complaints as well others on net neutrality violations.

Step Three: Report to Cert-IN

As a finishing touch, we have filed an Incident Report with Cert-In on the various instances of code injections we have received and also identified by attaching it as evidence. Many of these code injections have been termed to be malicious.  To clarify the issue, we have provided a letter providing the reason for our complaint (Read here for more).

As we wait for the responses from these various bodies, IFF will continue to document any and all net neutrality violations users might face through our online reporting tool.

Please do report any violations you come across at https://savetheinternet.in/report/.  

  • Incident report and Representation to Cert-IN (link)
  • Representation to the Department of Telecommunications on the lack of action on Net Neutrality violations dated 29.07.2019 (link)
  • Representation to the Department of Telecommunications on continued reports of Net Neutrality violations dated 29.05.2019 (link)
  • Recent representation to the Department Of Telecommunications on reports of net neutrality violations dated 27.03.2019 (link)

#SaveTheInternet! Become a IFF member today.

Subscribe to our newsletter, and don't miss out on our latest updates.

Similar Posts

Delhi High Court directs government to submit affidavit confirming lack of written records in Aarogya Setu’s development

Updates on Saurav Das’ writ petition before the Delhi High Court, where he is contesting the Central Information Commission’s decision to withhold information related to Aarogya Setu.

4 min read

Supreme Court refers challenge to constitutionality of sedition law to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

Noting that the past cases under Section 124-A will not be affected on account of introduction of new Bills, a 3-judges bench of the Supreme Court led by the CJI has referred the petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 124-A to a larger Bench of at least 5 judges

5 min read

Shooting down bad ideas: Our response to TRAI’s consultation paper on OTT Regulation and Selective Banning

TRAI released a consultation paper on OTT regulation and selective banning. In our response, we expressed our view against the licensing and registration as well as selective banning of OTT communication services. See the post to read our detailed comments.

5 min read

Donate to IFF

Help IFF scale up by making a donation for digital rights. Really, when it comes to free speech online, digital privacy, net neutrality and innovation — we got your back!