The news agency Asian News International (ANI) on Friday (September 6, 2024) issued a rebuke to the Wikimedia Foundation on the latter’s statement responding to the Delhi High Court verbally threatening a ban on Wikipedia in India. The online encyclopedia’s operator faced the court’s ire when it did not disclose details of users who had made edits to a Wikipedia entry on ANI, which the agency called “defamatory”. 

“It is surprising that the petitioners chose to initiate contempt proceedings before the Foundation could fully appraise the Hon’ble Court” of making a representation resisting this demand, the Foundation had said. ANI’s lawsuit is regarding language on its Wikipedia page, wherein it is stated that “accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions”. 

In a statement on behalf of ANI shared with The Hindu, the agency termed the response “misleading”. “Wikimedia Foundation was duly represented before the Court when the direction for disclosure of user information was directed within two weeks i.e. September 3, 2023,” the statement said. 

“Wikimedia being represented by counsel at the hearing had a full opportunity to appraise the Court of its position. Wikimedia however at this stage never objected to the issuance of the direction,” the statement added. 

Terming the Foundation’s acts “a clear violation of a direction of the Court,” ANI said that the former had only informed the agency of its intent to “file an application to seek directions”. 

A Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson did not immediately respond to ANI’s statement. In its earlier statement, the Foundation said that the ANI entry on Wikipedia is backed up by news reports from outlets that users have voted as reliable, and that any user is free to “improve” the page. Currently, the page is locked due to rapid editing attempts, and only users with a minimum of 300 contributions to Wikipedia are permitted to make changes.

The High Court’s threat of a ban on Wikipedia drew worried reactions from the legal community. Constitutional scholar Gautam Bhatia termed the order, which has not yet been uploaded on the court’s website in full, “a complete overreach”. “If you don’t like India, please don’t work in India,” the court had remarked.