India’s Digital Authoritarianism: A Threat to Free Expression

India, long pretended as the world’s largest democracy, is now clearly moving towards digital dictatorship. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the space for free speech is shrinking fast. The legal case between Elon Musk’s platform X (formerly Twitter) and the Indian government is not just a legal fight; it is a major example of how power is being used to control speech online. It shows how the Indian government is becoming more aggressive in stopping people from speaking freely.

State Machinery Turned Against the Public

In 2023, the Indian government started an online system called Sahyog, which means “cooperation.” But in practice, it is being used to control what people say on social media. What was said to be a way to stop false news has become a tool to silence people. By 2024, Sahyog was being used by local police and central agencies to remove posts, pictures, and comments. This system now treats every critical voice as a problem, even if it is peaceful or true.

Censorship Masked as Sovereignty

According to documents reviewed by Reuters, Indian officials gave more than 1,400 takedown orders between March 2024 and June 2025. Most of these came from the Cybercrime Coordination Centre, under the direction of Home Minister Amit Shah. These orders were not about stopping violence. They focused on:

• Cartoons about inflation
• Posts calling government leaders lazy
• Reports about a deadly stampede at New Delhi Railway Station
• Memes shared by the ruling party’s own supporters
• Posts about Amit Shah’s son, even when they were clearly jokes

The reasons given for these actions were often unclear, using terms like “public safety” or “national interest” without explaining how these were in danger. This shows that the main goal is not to protect the public, but to protect those in power from being criticised.

The Criminalisation of Opinion

This method turns free speech into a crime. A democracy that cannot accept cartoons, jokes, or honest reports has already lost its meaning. The government has used the law as a weapon, making regular opinions seem like threats and making honest discussion look dangerous. In this kind of environment, media platforms are forced to follow government orders instead of allowing people to speak freely.

Even more worrying is how this censorship is becoming normal. It is not something temporary. The government is setting new rules where only one voice is allowed — the voice of the state.

IIOJK: The First Casualty of Digital Repression

The worst impact of this policy can be seen in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). This region has faced internet bans, arrests for social media posts, spying on journalists, and the removal of entire pages online. These actions were first tested in IIOJK and are now being used across India. This shows how a method used in one region can become the rule for the entire country.

X Stands Alone in Resistance

In March 2025, X refused to follow India’s censorship orders and filed a legal case. The company called Sahyog a “censorship gateway.” This was not a small step. It became a big moment in the global conversation about freedom of speech. While other tech companies like Meta and Google stayed silent, X decided to fight. The case has shown how serious the situation is and how India’s government is trying to fully control what people say online.

This case is not just important for one company. It is a big test for all technology companies. If India is allowed to win, other countries may start doing the same. The internet could become a place where only governments decide what is allowed.

Corporate Compromise and Global Silence

Other technology companies have avoided taking a stand. Their silence shows that they are more focused on keeping business deals than defending free speech. This is a dangerous sign. When companies ignore human rights to protect their profits, it becomes the job of journalists and civil society to speak up. If they don’t, people’s rights will continue to be taken away silently.

Digital Space Is Not State Property

The internet should be a place where people can share ideas, ask questions, and hold leaders responsible. India’s attempt to take over this space is a direct attack on democracy. If every opinion must be approved by the state, then the idea of free speech becomes meaningless.

Freedom of speech is not a gift from the government. It is a basic right protected by international laws. When any country starts controlling speech in the name of peace or safety, it is no longer acting like a democracy. India is very close to crossing that line.

Global Implications of India’s Digital Clampdown

This is not just India’s issue. If India succeeds in this method of control, many other countries may copy it. The Modi government’s example — a government-controlled internet with unclear laws — is already attractive to leaders with similar goals. If the world stays quiet, this model will spread. The silence will be seen as support.

Conclusion: The Choice is Clear

The legal fight between X and the Indian government is more than a court case. It is a turning point. India is trying to shape the future of the internet in a way that allows only one voice. If that happens, the internet will stop being a place for freedom.

This is not just about one country or one platform. It is about what kind of future we want — a future where people can speak without fear, or a future where silence is forced.

The time to act is now. Delaying action will only give more power to those who want control. Those who believe in freedom must speak. The world will remember who stood up and who stayed silent.