The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology has selected satellite internet services for detailed examination amid the ongoing dispute involving Elon Musk’s Starlink and its delayed commercial launch in India.
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Nishikant Dubey, who chairs the committee, confirmed the decision on Wednesday following a meeting of the panel. “We will discuss the satellite net issue at our meeting in the coming days,” he told PTI.
The move comes amid a public disagreement between Musk and the Indian government over Starlink’s entry into the Indian market. Musk accused Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani of operating a monopoly that was preventing Starlink, a satellite-based internet provider, from entering the country. Dubey responded on Monday, stating that India would not change its security policy under pressure.
The dispute has brought renewed attention to national security concerns and regulatory requirements governing satellite internet services. The government has maintained that operators must comply with applicable security and regulatory standards before launching commercial services in India.
Starlink, Reliance Jio’s satellite communications venture Jio Satcom, and Bharti-backed Eutelsat OneWeb have applied for permission to offer satellite internet services in the country. Bharti also operates Airtel’s nationwide mobile and internet network.
Court Directs Mahua Moitra to Remove Social Media Posts
In a separate development, Dubey shared a court order directing Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra to remove two posts from her X account. The posts, dated October 3 and October 6, allegedly described Dubey as a “vote chor” and accused him of being responsible for the disenfranchisement of voters.
The order directed Moitra to delete both posts within 24 hours of receiving the order, including through email. It also restrained her from publishing or sharing allegedly defamatory statements accusing Dubey of electoral wrongdoing, including claims that he had committed illegal acts, was solely responsible for disenfranchising voters or had acted at the direction of a “maalik”.
However, the interim order clarified that it did not prevent Moitra from expressing fair criticism of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls or official decisions related to the exercise.
The court permitted Moitra to submit a written objection and clarified that its observations were based on a preliminary assessment for the interim application and did not constitute a final determination of the dispute.
The order further stated that if Moitra failed to comply with the direction to remove the posts, Dubey could approach X’s grievance officer under the Information Technology Rules, 2021.
