Policies · eGov
The Centre says it is open to amending DPDP Act rules or the law itself to ensure journalists and media houses are not impeded, days after the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the legislation.
✦ AI SUMMARY 30-second read
- Senior MeitY officials say the DPDP Act applies to data fiduciaries, not to journalists or media houses.
- Rules can be amended to carve out explicit exemptions for media; the law itself can be changed if needed.
- The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a plea by Digital News Publishers Association, which represents 21 news media organisations, challenging the Act's provisions.
Why it matters: The government's openness to amending the DPDP Act could determine how far press freedom is protected under India's data protection framework.
This summary was generated by AI. Editors may review and update it.
Document details
| Document type | Rules & Regulation |
|---|---|
| Issued by | Government of India |
| Region | India |
| Published | 31 October 2026 |
The Centre has said it is willing to amend the rules under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, and if required the law itself, so that journalists and media houses are not hampered in their work. Senior officials at the ministry of electronics and information technology made the statement on Friday.
The move follows the Supreme Court's agreement to hear a challenge filed by Digital News Publishers Association, which represents 21 leading news media organisations. The association contended that the Act violates the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression and threatens the full range of journalistic activity.
What the government said
MeitY officials stated that the provisions flagged as potentially violative of constitutional free-speech guarantees apply to data fiduciaries — those who hold and control data — and not to journalists. "This law is only on data fiduciaries. Journalists and media houses do not come under this category," an official said.
On the concern that the Act contains no express exemption for media, an official said the rules could be amended to address that gap. "The rules have the same power as the law. If necessary, we can go a step further to change the law itself," the official added.
I&B Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said on Friday that Section 7 of the Act is directed at data fiduciaries and that media does not fall within its scope. He added that the government is committed to upholding constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of expression.
What the document says
Section 7 of the DPDP Act states that personal data of a data principal may be processed by a data fiduciary for a specified purpose for which the data principal has voluntarily provided her personal data and in respect of which she has not indicated that she does not consent to the use of her personal data.
The Act has been justified on grounds of citizens' right to privacy, the need to protect data, and the obligations it places on data fiduciaries.
Who is affected
The DNPA, representing 21 news media organisations, challenged various provisions of the Act and the rules framed under it, arguing the law threatens the full spectrum of journalistic activity.
Officials said exemptions for journalists will be addressed through the rules and, if needed, through amendments to the law itself.
What happens next
The Supreme Court is set to examine the DNPA's plea. In parallel, the government has indicated it will consider carving out explicit exemptions for media in the rules or in the legislation, depending on what is required to address outstanding concerns.