Supreme Court Of India Must Expand Privacy Rights In India

Enactment of suitable Privacy Laws in India is long overdue. However, the Government of India has not considered this issue to be important enough.This is so even if Projects like Aadhar, NATGRID, CCTNS, etc may be declared to be “Unconstitutional” by Constitutional Courts of India. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court and this occasion can be utilised by it for prescribing “Stringent and Suitable” Privacy Rights Guidelines.

Few things related to 2G Scam have happened in the right perspective so far at the Supreme Court of India. The questioning of Supreme Court regarding inaction on the part of Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) India, giving due credit to the CAG’s Report, accepting Ratan Tata’s Writ Petition regarding Privacy Rights Violation, etc are some of them.

The latest to add to this list is denial of Supreme Court to issue any “Interim Relief” in the Tata’s Writ Petition and issuing of notices to open and outlook magazines which had published contents of the alleged taped conversation.

Tata had sought an interim relief for restraining the respondents from further publication of recorded conversations between him and Radia. He also sought an Injunction that would prevent the publishing and circulation of the contents of these conversations in “Any Form”. However, is it possible and does it make any difference at this stage?

The answer seems to be in Negative although Tata may not like the same. This is because contents of conversations are already out in “Public Domain” and on multiple traditional and electronic mediums and platforms. It is not possible for the Supreme Court of India or even for the Government of India to do much at this stage and in this regard.

However, one aspect has skipped the attention of all parties to the Writ Petition and even of the Supreme Court. The sole purpose of Ratan Tata seems to be to protect “His Privacy Rights” by preventing the “Disclosure and Circulation” of conversation or communication recorded through “Surveillance Methods” of State machinery. At this stage this concern and demand seems to be “Infructuous” and “Academic Purpose” only. This is because even if Supreme Court of India provides the “Relief” that Tata is claiming “In Toto”, the “Contents” of the conversation would remain on Internet and this is next to impossible to remove.

There is a blessing in disguise in Tata’s Petition. This is a golden chance for the Supreme Court of India to analyse the “Implementation” of its decision in the PUCL case (Phone Tapping Case). The Supreme Court must “Widen” the scope of Privacy Rights in India not only in the context of Phone Tapping but in an “Overall Manner”. The Supreme Court must formulate and lay down the widest possible “Guidelines” regarding Privacy Protection in India as it has done in the Vishaka’s Case (Guidelines against Sexual Harassment).

I hope this Writ Petition by Tata would come as a rescue of Fundamental Rights in general and Right to Privacy of Indians in particular. The only question that remains to be seen is will the Supreme Court of India protect Privacy Rights of Indians at large? I am optimistic and would be glad to see this outcome.

When Rights Are Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Have Rights

Philip R. "Phil" Zimmermann Jr. (born February 12, 1954) is one of the greatest civil liberty protectors in the cyberspace. Zimmermann is the creator of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), the most widely used email encryption software in the world. He is also known for his work in VoIP encryption protocols, notably ZRTP and Zfone.

In his rationale for creating PGP he tells that using PGP is good for preserving democracy. He believes that if privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy. This is so true not only in the context of America but also India.

India is passing through the worst era of police state and e-surveillance society. Even worst is the reliance upon American models that have failed in America itself. But Home Minister P.Chidambaram is not discouraged by these failures and he would stop only on the failure of these models in India.

Even the Department of Information Technology (DIT) and Department of Telecommunications (DOT) have joined this blind and ignorant race and are trying to ban telecommunication services like Blackberry and Skype and Internet services like Gmail.

These departments are troubled by the strong and secure encryption technology and other similar technologies that prevent unlawful and illegal e-surveillance by the government and its agencies. Criminals and terrorists are already using these, and much better options, and these ignorant actions would only trouble and violate the civil liberties of law abiding citizens alone.

All the limits in this regard were crossed when the Information Technology Amendment Act 2008 (IT Act 2008) was made an enforceable law in India. The IT Act 2008 provides unregulated, unconstitutional and illegal e-surveillance, Internet censorship and website blocking powers in the hands of Indian government and its agencies. There is no mechanism at all that can prevent the abuses of these powers and there is no accountability as well.

A time has come in India when Human Rights in Cyberspace are clearly outlawed and only outlaws (as per the norms and standards of Indian government) would have these Human Rights. This is the main reason why I dedicated a resource titled Human Rights Protection in Cyberspace (HRPIC) to those law abiding citizens who cherish and wish to protect their civil liberties in cyberspace.

With further illegal and unconstitutional projects like CCTNS, NATGRID, UID Project/Aadhar Project, etc things are only going to be worst in India. The only option remains is to use self defence against the persons, institutions and agencies that are engaging in illegal and unconstitutional e-surveillance and civil liberty violations.