India's data protection framework does not differentiate between children of different ages, treating a six-year-old and a seventeen-year-old identically under the law, according to medianama.com. This contrasts with other BRICS countries, such as Brazil, China, and Indonesia, which have tiered regulations based on age groups for online safety and social media use. India’s approach is embedded in Section 9 of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, which defines a child as anyone under 18 without further age distinctions.
The lack of age-specific provisions in India’s online safety laws was highlighted in a recent MediaNama newsletter dated September 5, 2026. While Brazil requires social media accounts of users under 16 to be linked to a legal guardian, China limits app usage time for under-16s and 16-17-year-olds and enforces curfews. Indonesia has a three-tiered regulatory system for minors aged under 13, 13 to 16, and 16 to 18. In contrast, India’s uniform definition of a child means no differentiation in protections or restrictions based on age.
This uniform approach by India is notable given its role as chair of the BRICS 2026 summit, where priorities include health, agriculture, labour, environment, innovation, and security, but not children’s online safety. Other BRICS members have developed more granular frameworks addressing minors’ digital rights and protections. India’s omission of children’s online safety from its agenda raises questions about its position on establishing common standards among BRICS nations, especially when others have advanced age-specific policies.
India’s DPDP Act Section 9 remains the sole legal reference for defining children online, with no age tiers or differentiated protections. The next BRICS summit under India’s chairship will test whether the country will address this gap or maintain its uniform approach to minors’ online safety.