NEW TELECOM INTERCEPTION RULES, WHO DIS?!
The people of India are safer than ever thanks to the Telecommunications Interception Rules of 2024!
With the ability to surveil anything in the interest of “public order” and the ability to declare an “emergency” for any reason, state privileges have been doubleplus expanded. Big Brother can now eradicate threats to your safety without the bureaucratic shackles of impartiality or judiciary pretense. As for WhatsApp and other upsettingly encrypted messaging platforms? Your enemies — and friends for that matter — will no longer have the ability to converse without government knowledge.
India’s prior Telegraph Act of 1885 was exactly as outdated as it sounds. And while the gears of the world’s largest democracy are notorious for turning slowly, a refresh was overdue. You said the bar for allowing the government to intercept your text messages or emails was too low? Well now the bar is removed. Better? You said the guardrails controlling judicial oversight were too unclear? Now they’re gone. Clear enough for you?
What’s more? The Department of Telecommunications’ investigative records are being rigorously purged to prevent criticism of authorities. So if you dare to take issue with India’s intelligence machine, don’t dally, as six months can pass in a hurry.
Some idiot once said that those who would sacrifice liberty in the interest of security will deserve neither and lose both. India is ready to put that old adage to the test.
SYNTAX ERROR
PRINTING JUST THE FACTS
- On Dec. 6, 2024, India replaced its 1951 Telegraph Rules with its new Telecommunications Interception Rules 2024, establishing fresh protocols for lawful surveillance of citizen communications following public consultation.
- The 2024 rules reduce the threshold to conduct surveillance from a necessity-based "determination" to a "consideration" of alternatives, making it easier for authorities to intercept communications with minimal justification or oversight.
- Surveillance records must be destroyed every six months under "extreme secrecy," which critics point out erases all evidence of state monitoring, shielding officials from accountability, and preventing citizens from ever discovering or contesting privacy violations
- By removing judicial oversight and centralizing review authority within the executive branch, the rules create a closed system where those authorizing surveillance also oversee its legitimacy, eliminating checks and balances.
- The vaguely defined "telecommunication services" and sweeping powers over digital platforms, combined with weak corporate accountability, risk expanding mass surveillance to encrypted messaging apps and stifling dissent and free speech.
Sources: Department of Telecommunications, Lexology, Financial Express, Internet Freedom, Tech Policy, and Bar and Bench.
REPORT ERROR Y/N?