If WhatsApp is required to crack end-to-end encryption on its network, it may cease operations in India, the company informed the Delhi High Court on Thursday, according to a report. The declaration was made during the hearing of the case brought by the Meta-owned instant messaging network and Facebook, which challenged Rule 4(2) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Interestingly, this regulation stipulates that when a legitimate authority directs it to, a social media middleman must assist in determining the original author of a particular communication.
“As a platform, we are saying, if we are told to break encryption, then WhatsApp goes,” attorney Tejas Karia, who was defending WhatsApp, reportedly said to a bench made up of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora. Additionally, Karia emphasized that users utilize the platform because they are comforted by its emphasis on security and privacy as well as the fact that all messages are end-to-end encrypted.
The advocate was referring to Rule 4(2) which states, “A significant social media intermediary providing services primarily in the nature of messaging shall enable the identification of the first originator of the information on its computer resource as may be required by a judicial order passed by a court of competent jurisdiction or an order passed under Section 69 of the Act by the Competent Authority.”
Karia further argued that this rule will force WhatsApp to store millions of messages on its server for multiple years as the platform does not know which messages might be asked to be decrypted. This effort could also stress the cloud servers of the platform and make the running and upkeep of the servers more expensive. Karia highlighted that WhatsApp has not been asked to share this information anywhere in the world.
Meanwhile, Kirtiman Singh, the Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) contended the position that there is a need to have some mechanism on social media to trace certain messages. The Court has held the position that a balance must be struck between both sides. The case has been adjourned to August 14.
