Digital rule, colonial echo – India’s IT Rules 2021 amendments

Note: This article was first published on the Constitutional Law and Philosophy blog and is being cross-posted here with permission. You can access the original post here.

This is a guest post by Rudraksh Lakra.

Introduction 

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology recently released draft amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (“IT Rules 2021”). This follows an earlier amendment introduced in February, including provisions that reduce takedown timelines to as little as three hours. Together, these developments have far-reaching implications for users and have prompted considerable public concern. The amendments raise serious constitutional and policy questions. This piece seeks to extend these concerns by offering a postcolonial critique, arguing that despite changes in technology, the regulatory impulse underpinning these rules reflects a deeper continuity with colonial modes of governance.

Colonial lineages of communication control

The IT Rules 2021 draw their authority from the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”), which vests the state with broad powers over digital communication, including surveillance and content blocking, without meaningful safeguards or independent oversight. This framework echoes colonial statutes such as the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Indian Post Office Act, 1898, both of which were designed to secure imperial control over communication networks. While this influence is most visible in provisions relating to interception and blocking, the IT Act more fundamentally reflects a model of governance characterised by extensive executive discretion and control.

The telegraph occupied a central place in British Indian administrative governance, serving as both an instrument of coordination and control. William Wilson Hunter’s observation that it formed “the basis not only of our military policy in India but also of the modern mercantile system” captures its strategic significance. The Telegraph Act of 1876 was among the earliest laws to authorise the interception of communications. Similarly, the Post Office Act, 1898, framework conferred wide discretion to intercept and detain correspondence. Together, these laws structured a particular relationship between the state and its subjects, grounded in hierarchy, surveillance, and suspicion.

A postcolonial transition might have marked a departure from these inherited structures. Instead, they were preserved and gradually extended after Independence. The continuity lies not only in the legal framework but also in the underlying logic that informs it. This continuity is evident in the IT Act, which translates earlier modes of communication control into the digital sphere. Although the medium has shifted from telegraph and telecom networks to online platforms, the architecture of control remains strikingly consistent.

IT…