Vaishnaw seeks open discussions with editors on DPDP concerns

Union minister for electronics and information technology (MeitY) Ashwini Vaishnaw on Wednesday said that the government has no intention of curtailing press freedom through the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) framework, and called for an open discussion with editorial leaders of news outlets to voice their concerns.

The law is set to come into force in phases, with the next set of provisions taking effect on November 13.

Asked whether the framework could be amended to protect journalistic work, Vaishnaw said that the government was “open to suggestions and act accordingly”.

The minister’s remarks come as the Supreme Court is hearing a petition by the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA), which represents 21 news publishers, challenging provisions of the DPDP Act, 2023, and the rules framed under it in November 2025. HT is also a member of the association.

“Journalistic freedom has been guaranteed by the Constitution. There is no intention to affect journalistic practices. The privacy law fully maintains journalistic freedom which the Constitution guarantees. The privacy law has been amended as such,” Vaishnaw said.

The law is based on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Puttaswamy v. Union of India that recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right. “The SC’s judgment has been, in a sense, converted into law by Parliament,” the minister told reporters.

Vaishnaw added that the DPDP framework was created after a consultation that lasted more than a year, in which newspapers, television channels, and other media took, part along with IT and other industry stakeholders. “It was clearly explained [what] the provisions of DPDP [were]. Nowhere does it infringe upon freedom of the press. No doubt about it,” he said.

At the heart of the challenge is Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, which amended Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The association contends that the amendment removes the earlier public-interest disclosure safeguard for personal information and could restrict access to records relevant to public accountability.

The plea argues that the data protection framework fails to distinguish journalism in public interest from other forms of processing personal data. Without such a distinction, reporters could face demands for consent, withdrawal of consent and erasure of personal information even when the information is relevant to investigations into corruption, corporate wrongdoing or misconduct by public officials, it contends.

The DPDP Rules were notified by MeitY on November 13, 2025. Provisions dealing with the basic framework, including the title, definitions and the setting up and functioning of the Data Protection Board, took effect on the day of notification. The rules gave a one-year window, which is ending November 13, 2026, before some of its key provisions come into effect.