Nearly 30% of takedown requests sent to ‘X’ focus on posts about Union Ministers and government agencies

Nearly 30% of Indian Government's Social Media Takedown Requests Target Criticism of Ministers

Government orders to remove social media posts in India are disproportionately focused on content about Union Ministers and investigative agencies, according to internal data from platform X (formerly Twitter). The revelations show nearly 30% of takedown requests from the Ministry of Home Affairs this year sought removal of posts discussing sitting ministers, while another 15% targeted commentary about agencies like the ED and CBI.  

The findings, shared by sources familiar with X's compliance process, reveal most removal orders cited broad concerns about "public order" or "national security" rather than specific legal violations. Digital rights groups argue this pattern suggests the legal powers meant to combat misinformation are being used to suppress political criticism.  

"The vague reasoning behind these takedowns creates a dangerous precedent," said digital rights activist Nikhil Pahwa. "When government criticism routinely gets labeled as threats to public order, it undermines the very concept of democratic debate."  

Government officials maintain all takedown requests follow proper procedure under India's IT Rules. "We act strictly within legal frameworks to prevent online content that could disrupt social harmony or spread misinformation," a Home Ministry spokesperson said.  

The data shows India remains among the world's most aggressive nations in demanding social media censorship. Last year, X complied with over 90% of Indian government removal requests according to its transparency reports. Legal experts note the lack of judicial oversight in the takedown process, with platforms often compelled to act first and allow appeals later.  

The revelations come amid growing global scrutiny of India's digital governance. While officials emphasize the need to combat online harms, civil society groups warn the current system lacks sufficient safeguards against potential misuse. As Parliament considers new digital regulations, these findings are likely to fuel debate about balancing security concerns with fundamental rights in the world's largest democracy.