- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Supreme Court Of India Gives RBI Six Weeks To Confirm If WhatsApp Has Complied With Data Localization Rules
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has been given six weeks by the Supreme Court of India to report if WhatsApp had complied with India’s domestic data localization norms.The development comes shortly after recent reports that the Facebook-owned WhatsApp's global head Will Cathcart was in New Delhi where he met senior government officials to reassure them that WhatsApp is...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has been given six weeks by the Supreme Court of India to report if WhatsApp had complied with India’s domestic data localization norms.
The development comes shortly after recent reports that the Facebook-owned WhatsApp's global head Will Cathcart was in New Delhi where he met senior government officials to reassure them that WhatsApp is now in full compliance with data localization norms.
It may be recalled that WhatsApp has already been testing a peer-to-peer payments service for more than a year in India, though local data storage norms have delayed an official launch.
Incidentally, the Supreme Court has also asked the government clarify within six weeks whether WhatsApp’s grievance officer would be based in India.
Presently, WhatsApp has a California-based grievance officer who handles India-related issues. Current Indian rules do not mandate a tech company to have such an executive stationed within the country, which is a rule the Indian government is likely to change.
Earlier, India’s technology minister had mentioned in Parliament that the government is seriously considering that social media firms “be required to locate their grievance officers in India”.
WhatsApp too has stated previously that it is working on stationing a grievance officer based in India.
Last year, foreign payment companies were caught off guard by an RBI directive which had mandated that all payments data should be stored “only in India” for “unfettered supervisory access”.
However, in June this year, it clarified these rules stating that foreign payment firms could process transactions done in India outside of country but the related data should be brought back for local storage within 24 hours.
WhatsApp had also faced an additional hurdle after a Delhi-based think-tank called, the Centre For Accountability And Systemic Change, moved the Supreme Court last year alleging that the company was not compliant with India’s payments data localization rules.
The Supreme Court recently asked the RBI to file its response to this petition.