Indian media organisations have challenged the government’s privacy law at the Supreme Court, warning that its requirements could restrict investigative journalism, expose reporters’ sources and force newsrooms to shut down.
The legal challenge was presented on Tuesday by the Digital News Publishers Association, which represents 21 news publishers.
The group argued that the law, introduced under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration, could undermine press freedom by requiring journalists to obtain consent from people they report on.
During the hearing, Madhavi Goradia Divan, counsel for the DNPA, criticised the legislation, saying it could fundamentally change the way news is reported.
“It is changing the whole concept of what is news,” Divan told the judges.
“Newsrooms will shut down, if we have to ask for permission…it’s then a complete regime of pre-censorship.”
The case represents one of the most prominent legal challenges to the privacy legislation, coming amid concerns about press freedom in India since Modi assumed office in 2014.
Critics have accused the government of presiding over a decline in media independence, allegations it has rejected, maintaining that it respects press freedom.
The publishers are seeking to have most of the law’s controversial provisions struck down before they take effect in May 2027.
They contend that the legislation could compel media organisations to delete published reports and empower the government to demand information that could reveal journalists’ confidential sources.
The DNPA’s members include major media organisations such as Network18, owned by billionaire Mukesh Ambani, NDTV, associated with billionaire Gautam Adani, the Indian Express and Times Internet, part of the Times of India group.
According to the publishers, media executives were assured during a meeting with the government in August that the law would safeguard press freedom.
However, they said the absence of an explicit exemption for journalists remained a major concern, particularly as similar protections exist in jurisdictions including the European Union, Singapore and Britain.
Divan also told the court that earlier versions of the legislation specifically exempted journalists, but the exemption was omitted from the final version.
The publishers had argued in their court filing earlier this month that the law could interfere with investigative reporting and give authorities greater access to information held by news organisations.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for November.
