The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Union government to respond by next week to a petition challenging the blocking of the digital news outlet 4PM’s YouTube channel on the grounds of “national security”, Bar and Bench reported.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan sought replies on the petition filed by Sanjay Sharma, the editor-in-chief of 4PM News, Live Law reported.

On April 29, the YouTube channel of 4PM News was blocked by the Union government. YouTube said that the channel was “unavailable in this country because of an order from the government related to national security or public order”. The channel had about 7.3 million subscribers.

Sharma claimed that the ban was an attempt to “crush a strong voice of democracy in the name of national security”. The channel had uploaded several videos criticising the Narendra Modi-led Union government after the Pahalgam terror attack, Newslaundry reported.

In his petition before the court, Sharma said that the channel was blocked following an undisclosed direction issued by the Union government on the grounds of “national security” and “public order”. The journalist added that he had not received any formal order on the blocking of the channel.

The petition noted that reasoned orders and a reasonable opportunity to be heard should be given before any blocking under Section 69A of the 2000 Information Technology Act.

“It settled law that the Constitution does not permit blanket removal of content without an opportunity to be heard,” Bar and Bench quoted the petition as saying. ‘“National security” and “public order” are not talismanic invocations to insulate executive action from scrutiny. They are constitutionally recognised grounds under Article 19(2), but are subject to the test of reasonableness and proportionality.”

Article 19(2) of the Constitution permits the state to impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression.

“A vague reference to these grounds, without even disclosing the offending content, makes it impossible for the petitioner to challenge or remedy the allegation, thereby depriving him of his fundamental right to free speech and fair hearing,” Sharma added.

The petition called the action taken by the Union government a “chilling assault on journalistic independence” and sought the quashing of the order blocking the YouTube channel.

At the hearing in court on Monday, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Sharma, said that the Union government did not issue a notice to him prior to the blocking of the channel, Live Law reported.

“This is ex-facie unconstitutional,” Live Law quoted Sibal as saying. “I don’t even have the blocking order. I don’t know what is against me.”

The bench will hear the case further next week.

On Thursday, the Editors Guild of India expressed concern about the Union government ordering the blocking of 4 PM’s YouTube channel and demanded a “transparent and accountable mechanism” for the takedown of journalistic content.

The press association said that it was “deeply concerned” by the Union government’s directive to block access to 4PM News’ YouTube channel on grounds of national security or public order “without any disclosure of the specific reasons or evidence, and without following principles of natural justice”.

“National security cannot become a pretext to silence critical voices or independent reporting,” it added.