Will Name Interim Resident Grievance Officer Soon: Twitter to Delhi HC

'Delay was caused as the person appointed as grievance officer withdrew his candidature', twitter told high court

Twitter has submitted an affidavit before the Delhi High Court stating that it will soon be appointing an interim resident grievance officer, as mandated by the new Information Technology Rules, NDTV reported.

The microblogging website further informed the high court that the delay was caused as the person who was named the interim resident grievance officer withdrew his candidature last month.

An Interim Resident Grievance officer was appointed as per the new IT Rules. However, even before steps could be taken to completely formalise the arrangement, the official withdrew his candidature on 21.6.2021

Twitter's affidavit

The affidavit was submitted before the Delhi High Court in a plea filed by a Twitter user alleging that his complaint against certain tweets were not acted upon promptly by the social media website.

At Final Stage of Appointment

In its affidavit, the social media giant informed the court that it is at the 'final stage' of finding the replacement for the person who withdrew his candidature last month.

We are in the final stages of appointing a replacement. In the meanwhile, the grievances of Indian users are being addressed by the Grievance Officer

Twitter's affidavit

Twitter further asked the court to dismiss the said petition as not maintainable since Twitter is a corporation registered in United States of America.

The court was informed that Twitter recently appointed Global Legal Policy Director Jeremy Kessel as grievance officer for India to follow the new IT rules.

Resident Grievance Officer 

As per Rule 4 of the new IT Rules, significant social media intermediaries are required to appoint a chief compliance officer, a nodal officer, and a grievance officer -- all whom are required to be residents of India.

Non-compliance would result in these platforms losing their intermediary status that provides them immunity from liabilities over any third-party data hosted by them. In other words, they could be liable for criminal action in case of complaints.

These firms also must publish monthly reports with details of complaints received and action taken. Taking action could include removing a piece of content or covering photos or videos that may be disturbing to some audiences with a warning.