![Outright lie, no one was raided or sent to jail: Rajeev Chandrasekhar to Dorsey](https://img.etimg.com/thumb/msid-100972841,width-650,height-488,imgsize-43462,resizemode-75/outright-lie-no-one-was-raided-or-sent-to-jail-rajeev-chandrasekhar-to-dorsey.jpg)
Story outline
■ Twitter was told that if it did not follow directions, the platform’s employees would be jailed, Dorsey alleged.
■ In early 2021, Twitter and the central government had been at loggerheads over content removal.
The relationship between intermediaries and the Indian government is "not adversarial," minister of state for electronics and information technology Rajeev Chandrasekhar told ET while adding that Dorsey's claims were "bizarre" and "astonishing.”
In an interview on Tuesday morning, Dorsey said that during the farmers’ protest of 2021, the Indian government had asked Twitter to take down some accounts belonging to farmers, journalists, activists, and other people critical of the central government and that it had threatened to shut down the platform in India.
![Twitter gfx Twitter gfx](https://img.etimg.com/photo/msid-42031747/et-logo.jpg)
Further, he claimed that Twitter was told that if it did not follow directions, the platform’s employees would be jailed, and their houses raided.
"What he is saying is wrong, absolutely false and an outright lie," said Chandrasekhar.
Discover the stories of your interest
Reiterating that the government's expectations of Twitter as well as of all other intermediaries is "simple and one dimensional," the minister said that “all platforms should be consistent and in compliance with Indian law and any other subordinate legislation under the law.”
Taking a jibe at Dorsey, Chandrasekar said that he found it "deeply ironic" and "hypocritical" that Dorsey was putting forth these allegations after all that was exposed in the Twitter files.
Dorsey was either "fed fiction" about the Indian government or was lying, the minister said that “it is astonishing and more than a little bizarre that someone would suddenly surface after two years of absolute silence on the Twitter files and start alleging something that never happened."
Noting that there was 'enough evidence' to show that Twitter was weaponising misinformation and muting people deliberately, Chandrasekar said encouraging misinformation in India while taking down misinformation in other jurisdictions indicated a double standard and a contempt for Indian law on the part of Twitter.
In early 2021, the American firm and the central government had been at loggerheads after Twitter refused to take down some of the content flagged by the IT ministry.
In response, the ministry had threatened legal action against the platform, while pointing out that the orders had to be followed as it had been issued under Section 69 A of the IT Act, which granted it emergency status.
Subsequently, Twitter has gone through a very high-profile upheaval and a change in management. Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, who took over the platform in October 2022, said that his company would comply with local laws rather than risk jail for its employees.
“The rules in India for what can appear on social media are quite strict and we can't go beyond the laws of the country. If we have a choice of either our people going to prison or we comply with the laws, we will comply with the laws,” Musk had said in April this year.
Later on Tuesday, former union minister for electronics and information technology Ravi Shankar Prasad also responded to Dorsey’s allegations and called them “false and baseless”.
“During the farmers’ protest, several anti-national elements had made their way to the Red Fort and took down the national flag. Several policemen were injured. The government had then asked Twitter just to take down such posts,” Prasad said.
The former union minister also accused Dorsey’s Twitter of adopting double standards and said that while the platform had immediately acted upon Twitter users who were involved in the Capitol Hill protests, they had not done so in India.
“They would appear before the US Congress and the House of Commons’ committees but refused to appear before the committees of India Parliament. This was not correct, and it was conveyed to them at that time,” Prasad said.