Social media platform Facebook (Now Meta) on Thursday filed its response in the Delhi High Court on the motion to suspend social media accounts.
Meta said that it is a private entity and does not exercise a public function and therefore the jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be invoked against it. Meta opposed the motion and requested its dismissal without going into the merits of it.
An affidavit filed on Meta’s behalf said the petitioner improperly sought to invoke the jurisdiction of this court against her.
The affidavit filed in the Wokeflix case states that Meta is not required to hold public office and that the government does not control its management and day-to-day operation.
It was also stated that the petitioner’s Instagram account was reactivated within 72 hours of its deactivation. Meta was given the opportunity to appeal the alleged actions taken against their account as they received notice of appeal within 30 days. Opportunity before action taken, as claimed by the petitioner, is against the law, which only requires intermediaries to provide the opportunity to appeal after action has been taken, in accordance with Rule 4 (8) Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Code of Ethics) Rules 2021.
The High Court was hearing petitions filed by Dimple Kaul, Suyash Deep Rai, Jasdeep Munjal, Wokeflix, Rachit Kaushik and lead solicitor Sanjay Hegde. The petitioners challenged actions by social media giants such as Twitter, YouTube and others to have their accounts suspended.
The petitioner called the action arbitrary and contrary to law and the Constitution. Their grievance is that their accounts were suspended without an opportunity to be heard.