On 27th January 2023, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (“MeitY”) notified three Grievance Appellate Committees (“GAC”) under Rule 3A of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (“IT Rules”). The Press Release published along with the Notification states that the GAC was established due to the large number of grievances left unaddressed or unsatisfactorily addressed by online intermediaries. It recognizes the GAC to be a “critical piece” in the larger legal framework in the Indian digital landscape. The Centre has appointed three members each to the three GACs so notified. The list of members of each GAC is provided later in the article.
Rule 3A of the IT Rules establishes the GAC to provide users an option to file an appeal against the decisions of the Grievance Officer (“GO”) appointed by online intermediaries. Therefore, if a user is not satisfied with the decision of a GO as appointed by an online intermediary, then such a user can prefer an appeal to the GAC within 30 days from the date of receipt of communication from the GO.
The Press Release states that all the operations of the GO will be conducted online, i.e., filing of appeal as well as a decision with respect to the same, will be delivered digitally. Users can file their appeals at https://www.gac.gov.in. However, given the transition period required by intermediaries to implement technical requirements, the website is scheduled to operationalize from the 1st of March 2023. Additionally, as per the IT Rules, online intermediaries are required to comply with the decisions of the GAC and publish a report with respect to the same on its website. The Press Release reiterates this obligation and states that periodic reviews, reporting, and disclosures of GAC orders will form a part of the appeal process.
The list of appointed members to the three GACs is as follows:
Members of Grievance Appellate Committee 1:
| 1. | Chief Executive Officer, Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), Ministry of Home Affairs | Chairperson ex officio; |
| 2. | Shri Ashutosh Shukla, Indian Police Service (Retired) | Wholetime member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier; |
| 3. | Shri Sunil Soni, former Chief General Manager and Chief Information Officer, Punjab National Bank | Whole time member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier |
Members of Grievance Appellate Committee 2:
| 1. | Joint Secretary in charge of Policy and Administration Division in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting | Chairperson ex officio; |
| 2. | Commodore Sunil Kumar Gupta (Retired), former Director (Personnel Services), Naval Head Quarters, Indian Navy | Wholetime member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier |
| 3. | Shri Kavindra Sharma, former Vice President (Consulting), L&T Infotech Limited | Whole time member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier |
Members of Grievance Appellate Committee 3:
| 1. | Ms Kavita Bhatia, Scientist G in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology | Chairperson ex officio; |
| 2. | Shri Sanjay Goel, Indian Railway Traffic Service (Retired) | Wholetime member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier; |
| 3. | Shri Krishnagiri Ragothamarao Murali Mohan, former Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, IDBI Intech Limited | Whole time member, for a term of three years from the date of assumption of office or until further orders, whichever is earlier |
Our Take:
The notification of the three GACs is a step toward ensuring that the concerns of users are adequately addressed. However, the impending question remains about the feasibility of addressing these appeals given that each intermediary has millions of users, consequently leading them to receive a large number of complaints. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that the three GACs have sufficient resources to expeditiously dispose of appeals preferred to it.
As we had pointed out in our blog on the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media and Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2022, the constitution of GAC does not bar the right of the aggrieved party to approach a court of law against the decision of a Grievance Officer. Accordingly, when there are conflicting orders by a Court and GAC there is no clarity on the course of action that may be pursued by the affected parties. Further, the GAC’s “adjudicatory powers” of a tribunal, in the absence of an enabling law, amounts to excessive delegation of power as per the precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (“Madras Bar Association”). In this case, the Supreme Court held that tribunals that are vested with judicial power should possess the same independence, security, and capacity as the courts that the tribunal seeks to substitute. It also opines that members sharing the functions of the tribunal should possess expertise in law and should be competent to discharge judicial functions which does not appear to the case with the members so listed and notified. Additionally, the procedure for the appointment of the GAC members has not been laid down and accordingly it is not clear on what basis the members have been appointed. These considerations may pose to be a bone of contention in the future.
This article was first published on Saikrishna and Associates