The draft withdrawn last week is republished with proposed changes to the country’s technology and social media regulations that aims to provide ‘more effective grievance proposal’ and to also plug ‘infirmities and gaps’ in the existing regulations.

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (Meity) has requested public feedback within 30 days of the draft's publication, and has stated that a full public consultation on the matter will take place by mid-June.

The amended notification, which comes a week after a similar draft was withdrawn, is expected to address issues posed by the growing digital ecosystem as well as loopholes in present legislation, particularly ‘with relation to Big Tech platforms’.

According to the IT ministry, the proposed reforms will provide more options for grievance redress outside of the courts, as well as new accountability rules for SSMIs (major social media intermediaries) to ensure that Indian citizens' constitutional rights are respected.

“Putting Interests of Digital Nagriks First. New amended IT (Intermediary) rules are out for Public consultn - more effectve grievance addressal n ensurng constitutional rights of ctzns r respected. No impact on Indian Startups,” tweeted Minister of State for Electronics and IT Rajeev Chandrasekhar commenting on the latest draft.

Meity also wants to make sure that the new laws don't have an impact on "early stage or growth stage Indian firms or startups."

The latest modifications, according to privacy advocates, emphasize "the goal of establishing greater accountability from platforms and proper protection of users' interests."

“This has been made necessary because a number of Intermediaries have acted in violation of constitutional rights of Indian citizens and keeping in mind that Government is the guarantor of such rights of all our citizens,” it notes.

They did, however, express reservations over content moderation deadlines, claiming that "necessary checks and balances on the powers and tasks of the Appellate Committee" are required.

“This is reflective from the addition of two new sub clauses to Rule 3 (1), directing all intermediaries to ensure continuous access to their services and respecting the constitutional rights of the citizenry. The additional mandates under Rule 3 (1) (b) to inform users about the terms and conditions and policies of the platforms is also notable to ensure greater transparency in platform’s practices," says Kazim Rizvi, co-founder, The Dialogue.