#FactCheck - AI-Generated Image Falsely Shows Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Touching Rahul Gandhi’s Feet

Introduction

The Government of India has initiated a cybercrime crackdown that has resulted in the blocking of 781,000 SIM cards and 208,469 IMEI (International Mobile Equipment Identity) numbers that are associated with digital fraud as of February 2025. This data was released as a written response by the Union Minister of State for Home Affairs, Bandi Sanjay Kumar, with respect to a query presented in the Lok Sabha. A significant jump from the 669,000 SIM cards blocked in the past year, efforts aimed at combating digital fraud are in full swing, considering the increasing cases. The Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) is proactively blocking other platform accounts found suspicious, such as WhatsApp Accounts (83,668) and Skype IDs (3,962) on its part, aiding in eliminating identified threat actors.

Increasing Digital Fraud And The Current Combative Measures

According to the data tabled by the Ministry of Finance in the Rajya Sabha, the first 10 months of the Financial year 2024-2025 have recorded around 2.4 million incidents covering an amount of Rs. 4,245 crore involving cases of digital Financial Fraud cases. Apart from the evident financial loss, such incidents also take an emotional toll as people are targeted regardless of their background and age, leaving everyone equally vulnerable. To address this growing problem, various government departments have dedicated measures to combat and reduce such incidents. Some of the notable initiatives/steps are as follows:

• The Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System- This includes reporting Cybercrimes through the nationwide toll-free (1930) number and registration on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. On being a victim of digital fraud, one can call the toll-free number, describing details of the incident, which would further help in the investigation. After reporting the incident, the complainant receives a generated login ID/acknowledgement number that they can use for further reference.
• International Incoming Spoofed Calls Prevention System- This is a mechanism developed to counter fraudulent calls that appear to originate from within India but are actually made from international locations. This system prevents the misuse of the Calling Line Identity (CLI), which is manipulated to deceive recipients in order to carry out financial crimes like digital arrests, among other things. Coordinating with the Department of Telecommunication (DoT), private telecommunication service providers (TSPs) are being encouraged to check with their ILD (International Long-Distance) network as a measure. Airtel has recently started categorising such numbers as International numbers on their part.
• Chakshu Facility at Sanchar Saathi platform- A citizen-centric initiative, created by the Department of Telecommunications, to empower mobile subscribers. It focuses on reporting unsolicited commercial communication (spam messages) and reporting suspected fraudulent communication. (https://sancharsaathi.gov.in/). 
• Aadhaar-based verification of SIM cards- A directive issued by the Prime Minister's Office to the Department of Telecommunications mandates an Aadhaar-based biometric verification for the issuance of new SIM cards. This has been done so in an effort to prevent fraud and cybercrime through mobile connections obtained using fake documents. Legal action against non-compliant retailers in the form of FIRs is also being taken.

On the part of the public, awareness of the following steps could encourage them on how to deal with such situations:

• Awareness regarding types of crimes and the tell-tale signs of the modus operandi of a criminal: A general awareness and a cautionary approach to how such crimes take place could help better prepare and respond to such malicious scams. Some important signs on the part of the offender include pressuring the victim into immediate action, insistence on video calls, and the threat of arrest in case of non-compliance. It is also important to note that no official authority, in any legal capacity, allows for enabling a digital/online arrest.
• Knowing the support channels: Awareness regarding reporting mechanisms and cyber safety hygiene tips can help in building cyber resilience amongst netizens. 

Conclusion

As cybercrooks continue to find new ways of duping people of their hard-earned money, both government and netizens must make efforts to combat such crimes and increase awareness on both ends (systematic and public). Increasing developments in AI, deepfakes, and other technology often render the public inept at assessing the veracity of the source, making them susceptible to such crime. A cautionary yet proactive approach is need of the hour. 

References

• https://mobileidworld.com/india-blocks-781000-sim-cards-in-major-cybercrime-crackdown/
• https://www.storyboard18.com/how-it-works/over-83k-whatsapp-accounts-used-for-digital-arrest-blocked-home-ministry-60292.htm
• https://www.business-standard.com/finance/news/digital-financial-frauds-touch-rs-4-245-crore-in-the-apr-jan-period-of-fy25-125032001214_1.html
• https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/govt-blocked-781k-sims-3k-skype-ids-83k-whatsapp-accounts-till-feb-125032500965_1.html
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2042130
• https://mobileidworld.com/india-mandates-aadhaar-biometric-verification-for-new-sim-cards-to-combat-fraud/ 
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2067113 

‍

Introduction 

Prebunking is a technique that shifts the focus from directly challenging falsehoods or telling people what they need to believe to understanding how people are manipulated and misled online to begin with. It is a growing field of research that aims to help people resist persuasion by misinformation. Prebunking, or "attitudinal inoculation," is a way to teach people to spot and resist manipulative messages before they happen.  The crux of the approach is rooted in taking a step backwards and nipping the problem in the bud by deepening our understanding of it, instead of designing redressal mechanisms to tackle it after the fact. It has been proven effective in helping a wide range of people build resilience to misleading information.

Prebunking is a psychological strategy for countering the effect of misinformation with the goal of assisting individuals in identifying and resisting deceptive content, hence increasing resilience against future misinformation. Online manipulation is a complex issue, and multiple approaches are needed to curb its worst effects. Prebunking provides an opportunity to get ahead of online manipulation, providing a layer of protection before individuals encounter malicious content. Prebunking aids individuals in discerning and refuting misleading arguments, thus enabling them to resist a variety of online manipulations. 

Prebunking builds mental defenses for misinformation by providing warnings and counterarguments before people encounter malicious content. Inoculating people against false or misleading information is a powerful and effective method for building trust and understanding along with a personal capacity for discernment and fact-checking. Prebunking teaches people how to separate facts from myths by teaching them the importance of thinking in terms of ‘how you know what you know’ and consensus-building. Prebunking uses examples and case studies to explain the types and risks of misinformation so that individuals can apply these learnings to reject false claims and manipulation in the future as well. 

How Prebunking Helps Individuals Spot Manipulative Messages

Prebunking helps individuals identify manipulative messages by providing them with the necessary tools and knowledge to recognize common techniques used to spread misinformation. Successful prebunking strategies include;

1. Warnings;
2. Preemptive Refutation: It explains the narrative/technique and how particular information is manipulative in structure. The Inoculation treatment messages typically include 2-3 counterarguments and their refutations. An effective rebuttal provides the viewer with skills to fight any erroneous or misleading information they may encounter in the future.
3. Micro-dosing: A weakened or practical example of misinformation that is innocuous. 

All these alert individuals to potential manipulation attempts. Prebunking also offers weakened examples of misinformation, allowing individuals to practice identifying deceptive content. It activates mental defenses, preparing individuals to resist persuasion attempts. Misinformation can exploit cognitive biases: people tend to put a lot of faith in things they’ve heard repeatedly - a fact that malicious actors manipulate by flooding the Internet with their claims to help legitimise them by creating familiarity. The ‘prebunking’ technique helps to create resilience against misinformation and protects our minds from the harmful effects of misinformation. 

Prebunking essentially helps people control the information they consume by teaching them how to discern between accurate and deceptive content. It enables one to develop critical thinking skills, evaluate sources adequately and identify red flags. By incorporating these components and strategies, prebunking enhances the ability to spot manipulative messages, resist deceptive narratives, and make informed decisions when navigating the very dynamic and complex information landscape online.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations

• Preventing and fighting misinformation necessitates joint efforts between different stakeholders. The government and policymakers should sponsor prebunking initiatives and information literacy programmes to counter misinformation and adopt systematic approaches. Regulatory frameworks should encourage accountability in the dissemination of online information on various platforms. Collaboration with educational institutions, technological companies and civil society organisations can assist in the implementation of prebunking techniques in a variety of areas.
• Higher educational institutions should support prebunking and media literacy and offer professional development opportunities for educators, and scholars by working with academics and professionals on the subject of misinformation by producing research studies on the grey areas and challenges associated with misinformation.
• Technological companies and social media platforms should improve algorithm transparency, create user-friendly tools and resources, and work with fact-checking organisations to incorporate fact-check labels and tools.
• Civil society organisations and NGOs should promote digital literacy campaigns to spread awareness on misinformation and teach prebunking strategies and critical information evaluation. Training programmes should be available to help people recognise and resist deceptive information using prebunking tactics. Advocacy efforts should support legislation or guidelines that support and encourage prebunking efforts and promote media literacy as a basic skill in the digital landscape. 
• Media outlets and journalists including print & social media should follow high journalistic standards and engage in fact-checking activities to ensure information accuracy before release. Collaboration with prebunking professionals, cyber security experts, researchers and advocacy analysts can result in instructional content and initiatives that promote media literacy, prebunking strategies and misinformation awareness.

Final Words

The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2024 identifies misinformation and disinformation as the top most significant risks for the next two years. Misinformation and disinformation are rampant in today’s digital-first reality, and the ever-growing popularity of social media is only going to see the challenges compound further. It is absolutely imperative for all netizens and stakeholders  to adopt proactive approaches to counter the growing problem of misinformation. Prebunking is a powerful problem-solving tool in this regard because it aims at ‘protection through prevention’ instead of limiting the strategy to harm reduction and redressal.  We can draw parallels with the concept of vaccination or inoculation, reducing the probability of a misinformation infection. Prebunking exposes us to a weakened form of misinformation and provides ways to identify it, reducing the chance false information takes root in our psyches.

The most compelling attribute of this approach is that the focus is not only on preventing damage but also creating widespread ownership and citizen participation in the problem-solving process. Every empowered individual creates an additional layer of protection against the scourge of misinformation, not only making safer choices for themselves but also lowering the risk of spreading false claims to others.  

References

• [1] https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf
• [2] https://prebunking.withgoogle.com/docs/A_Practical_Guide_to_Prebunking_Misinformation.pdf
• [3] https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/17634/3565

‍

Introduction

‍

Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals through its own gaps. States often find themselves navigating a shared frontier without a mutual guide or lines of law in an era of expanding digital boundaries and growing cyber damages. The United Nations General Assembly ratified the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on December 24, 2024, and more than sixty governments were in attendance in the signing ceremony on 24th & 25th October this year, marking a moment of institutional regeneration and global commitment. 

‍

A new Lexicon for Global Order

The old liberal order is being strained by growing nationalism, economic fracturing, populism, and great-power competition as often emphasised in the works of scholars like G. John Iken berry and John Mearsheimer. Multilateral arrangements become more brittle in such circumstances. Therefore, the new cybercrimes convention represents not only a legal tool but also a resurgence of international promise, a significant win for collective governance in an uncertain time. It serves as a reminder that institutions can be rebuilt even after they have been damaged. 

‍

In Discussion: The Fabric of the Digital Polis

‍

The digital sphere has become a contentious area. On the one hand, the US and its allies support stakeholder governance, robust individual rights, and open data flows. On the other hand, nations like China and Russia describe a “post-liberal cyber order” based on state mediation, heavily regulated flows, and sovereignty. Instead of focusing on ideological dichotomies, India, which is positioned as both a rising power and a voice of the Global South, has offered a viewpoint based on supply-chain security, data localisation, and capacity creation. Thus, rather than being merely a regulation, the treaty arises from a framework of strategic recalibration. 

‍

What Changed & Why it Matters

‍

There have been regional cybercrime accords up to this point, such as the Budapest Convention. The goal of this new international convention, which is accessible to all UN members, is to standardise definitions, evidence sharing and investigation instruments. 72 states signed the Hanoi signature event in October, 2025, demonstrating an unparalleled level of scope and determination. In addition to establishing structures for cooperative investigations, extradition, and the sharing of electronic evidence, it requires signatories to criminalise acts such as fraud, unlawful access to systems, data interference, and online child exploitation. 

For the first time, a legally obligatory global architecture aims to harmonise cross-border evidence flows, mutual legal assistance, and national procedural laws. Cybercrime offers genuine promise for community defence at a time when it is no longer incidental but existential, attacks on hospitals, schools and infrastructure are now common, according to the Global Observatory.

‍

Holding the Line: India’s Deliberate Path in the Age of Cyber Multilateralism 

‍

India takes a contemplative rather than a reluctant stance towards the UN Cybercrime Treaty. Though it played an active role during the drafting sessions and lent its voice to the shaping of global cyber norms, New Delhi is yet to sign the convention. Subtle but intentional, the reluctance suggests a more comprehensive reflection, an evaluation of how international obligations correspond with domestic constitutional protections, especially the right to privacy upheld by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017). 

Prudence is the reason for this halt. Policy circles speculate that the government is still assessing the treaty’s consequences for national data protection, surveillance regimes, and territorial sovereignty. Officials have not provided explicit justifications for India’s refusal to join. India’s position has frequently been characterised by striking a careful balance between digital sovereignty and taking part in cooperative international regimes. In earlier negotiations, India had even proposed including clauses to penalise “offensive messages” on social media, echoing the erstwhile Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, but the suggestion found little international traction. 

Advocates for digital rights such as Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now have warned that ensuring that the treaty’s implementation upholds constitutional privacy principles may be necessary for India to eventually endorse it. He contends that the treaty’s wording might not entirely meet India’s legal requirements in the absence of such voluntary pledges. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres praised the agreement as “a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defences against “cybercrime” during its signing in Hanoi. The issue for India is to make sure that multilateral collaboration develops in accordance with constitutional values rather than to reject that vision. Therefore, the path forward is one of assertion rather than absence, careful march towards a cyber future that protects freedom and sovereignty. 

‍

Sources: 

• https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12244&lid=7470 
• https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-72-nations-un-first-cybercrime-treaty-india-abstains-privacy/ ‍
• https://therecord.media/us-declines-signing-cybercrime-treaty