The Blocking of Vikatan: Examining Government Censorship and Digital Regulations in India

23-02-2025

12:30 PM

1 min read

What’s in Today’s Article?

Recently, a Tamil magazine’s website was blocked by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) after publishing a controversial cartoon, sparking outrage and legal challenges.

On February 15, 2025, a Tamil magazine Vikatan’s website became inaccessible for many users following a complaint by BJP Tamil Nadu President K. Annamalai to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB).
The complaint was triggered by a cartoon depicting Prime Minister Narendra Modi alongside former U.S. President Donald Trump, referring to the deportation of migrants from the U.S. to India.
While the Union Government did not officially confirm or deny the website blocking, sources revealed that the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) issued the directive based on MIB’s instructions.
The incident has sparked a debate on digital censorship and press freedom in India.

The February 10 edition of Vikatan Plus (the magazine’s digital version) published a cartoon portraying PM Modi in shackles, symbolizing the forcible deportation of Indian migrants from the U.S..
The BJP’s Tamil Nadu unit viewed the illustration as offensive, prompting Annamalai to demand action. Following the complaint:
- The MIB directed the DoT to block Vikatan’s website, resulting in restricted access on multiple internet networks.
- No official public statement or notice was issued explaining the reason for the blocking.
The magazine, along with political figures like Tamil Nadu CM M.K. Stalin, condemned the move as an attack on press freedom.

The government can legally block websites under Section 69A of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, which allows restrictions in cases of:
- Threat to national security, sovereignty, and public order.
- Defamation or incitement of violence.
The blocking process is confidential, and affected websites often receive no formal notice.

2009 IT Blocking Rules
- Ministries or state departments can recommend website blocking to a designated IT officer.
- A review committee decides on the action, and the DoT directs telecom providers to enforce the block.
2021 IT Rules (Intermediary Guidelines & Digital Media Ethics Code)
- Empower the I&B and IT Ministries to issue emergency content removal orders.
- Unlike Section 69A, which blocks entire websites, these rules focus on specific content takedowns.
Since most websites now use HTTPS encryption, blocking individual pages is challenging unless the publisher removes them voluntarily.

Telecom operators restricted access to Vikatan's website after receiving DoT orders.
The magazine was not given prior notice, violating the usual 2009 blocking procedure.
On February 16, Vikatan received a separate notice under the 2021 IT Rules, addressing the cartoon’s content but not the full website block.
A hearing was scheduled for February 20, where Vikatan defended its case, stating it violates press freedom principles.

Lack of Transparency in Website Blocking
- No public acknowledgment of the order has been made by the government.
- Blocking orders under Section 69A are confidential, reducing accountability.
Rising Concerns Over Political Censorship
- Critics argue that website blocking is being used as a political tool rather than for national security concerns.
- Press organizations worry that restrictions on digital media are increasing.
Press Freedom vs. Government Regulation
- Media houses argue that Vikatan’s cartoon falls under political satire, a protected form of expression in a democracy.
- The government’s broad discretionary powers in blocking websites raise concerns over potential misuse.

Need for Greater Transparency
- Experts suggest making blocking orders public and subject to judicial review.
- Affected parties should receive formal notices to present their case before a decision is made.
Balancing National Security with Press Freedom
- The government must differentiate between genuine security threats and political dissent.
- A clearer framework on digital content restrictions will help avoid arbitrary censorship.
Strengthening Legal Safeguards
- The Supreme Court may be called upon to define the limits of website blocking, ensuring it aligns with constitutional rights.
- Reforms in IT laws could bring more accountability to the process.

The Vikatan website block raises important concerns about government censorship, transparency, and press freedom.
While blocking laws exist to safeguard national security, their application to political content remains controversial.
Moving forward, greater legal clarity and accountability will be essential to protect both media independence and responsible governance.

Q1. Why was Vikatan’s website blocked?

Ans. The website was blocked after BJP Tamil Nadu’s K. Annamalai complained about a political cartoon featuring PM Modi.

Q2. Under which law can the government block websites?

Ans. Websites can be blocked under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, for reasons including national security and public order.

Q3. How does the website blocking process work in India?

Ans. A designated IT committee reviews blocking requests, and if approved, the DoT directs telecom providers to enforce the block.

Q4. What legal options does Vikatan have?

Ans. Vikatan can challenge the blocking order through the review committee or file a petition in the High Court.

Q5. Why is this case important for press freedom?

Ans. The lack of transparency and political nature of the complaint raise concerns about censorship and media independence in India.

Source: TH