Natgrid Project Of India Must Comply With Civil Liberties To Be Constitutional

The importance of Human Rights in Cyberspace was recently reiterated when the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) of India asked for further “Safeguards” before the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) can be launched in India. The Home Ministry has to now ensure “Adequate and Strong Safeguards” before Natgrid can be launched in India.

Human Rights Protection in Cyberspace is a tricky issue. On the one hand we have to respect the civil liberties like right to privacy, right to speech and expression, right against Internet censorship, etc whereas on the other hand we have to comply with the State’s right to regulate its citizens and territories. Here comes the real problem as Internet or cyberspace is boundary less.

The problem is not unique to India alone but is a universal problem. Whether it is the “anonymity controversy” regarding Google or recent controversy regarding “censorship” by China or the blocking of the website of zone-h.org in India or any other similar incidence, governments all over the world are unable to cope up with the present information and communication technology (ICT) systems. As a result they are superimposing the traditional concepts to cyberspace resulting in absurd results, says Praveen Dalal, leading techno-legal expert of India.

There is an emergent need to formulate good techno-legal regulation regarding human right protection in cyberspace. We cannot blindly apply the traditional concepts to cyberspace and we need a separate and dedicate branch of techno-legal laws and regulation in this regard. In the Indian context one such initiative has already been undertaken by Perry4Law.

The initiative intends to provide a techno-legal framework to the stakeholders and governments. In the Indian context, it would cover those areas that have a tendency to violate human rights in real life as well as cyberspace. Some of the areas include Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems (CCTNS) Project (CCTNS Project), National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) of India, E-Surveillance under the Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act 2000) and other laws, etc.

The “suggestions” of Praveen Dalal regarding privacy protection and prevention of potential misuse of information for political ends gathered through NATGRID have already been accepted by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) of India. In the end, the CCS withheld its nod and asked the Home Ministry to come back after further consultation with all stakeholders.

Let us hope that the proposed initiative on protection of civil liberties in cyberspace would prove useful to all concerned.

SOURCE: OPEDNEWS

Cabinet Committee On Security Of India Desires Safeguards In Natgrid Project

Recently the proposal to establish national intelligence grid (NATGRID) in India was considered by Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) of India. However, the CCS was advised in advanced by techno-legal experts like Praveen Dalal regarding the possible political misuse and violation of civil liberties of the Indian citizens. As a result, the CCS withheld its nod and asked the Home Ministry to come back after further consultation with all stakeholders.

In the past Praveen Dalal has suggested that NATGRID is an essential requirement for robust and effective intelligence agencies and law enforcement functions in India. The only requirement is to ensure that its abuses can be anticipated, prevented and remedied.

The Home Ministry of India would now start fresh discussions with various stakeholders to ensure that NATGRID may not be abused in future. The task is difficult and it would be beneficial to consult good techno-legal experts in this regard.

The most important aspect that must be kept in mind by the government of India is that it must reconcile the national security aspects of India with human rights protection in cyberspace. This is a difficult task especially in the absence of a dedicate privacy law and data protection law in India, says Praveen Dalal.

A “dedicated resource” in this regard has been launched by Perry4Law [ http://perry4law.com/hr/index.html ] in this regard that may be helpful for the Indian government while implementing projects like Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems (CCTNS) Project (CCTNS Project), National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) of India, E-Surveillance under the Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act 2000) and other laws, etc.

SOURCE: MYNEWS

Privacy And E-Surveillance Issues Must Be Resolved First By UIDAI

The Unique Identification Project of India is based upon lack of planning and foresight. The hit and trial attitude of the Government of India (GOI) coupled with the charitable tendencies to distribute the public money among corrupt officials of India without any transparency and accountability would once again fail another much needed project in India. The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) is not a “legally constituted” authority. In the absence of just and reasonable law(s) to support the same, it would violate the Human Rights and Fundamental Rights of the citizens of India, say techno-legal experts like Praveen Dalal. The interaction of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) with Human Rights is no more a science fiction and India must keep in mind the mandates of Human Rights Protection in Cyberspace while implementing projects that have no legal sanction and backing.

The security and privacy issues of UIDAI have been raised times and again. The real problem seems to be that neither UIDAI nor its functions are legally valid and constitutionally sound. In its present form they are violative of not only the sacrosanct Human Rights but also the Fundamental Rights conferred by the Constitution of India (COI), says Praveen Dalal.

The first and foremost evil of UIDAI without a proper legal framework is that it would violate the “Right to Privacy” as conferred under Article 21 of the Constitution. This is not expressly mentioned in it but the same has been enunciated by way of judicial interpretation by the Supreme Court of India. India is a signatory to the International covenant on civil and political rights, 1966. Article 17 thereof provides for the “right of privacy”. Article 17 of the international covenant does not go contrary to any part of our municipal law. Article 21 has, therefore, to be interpreted in conformity with the international law.

Even the “Data Protection” requirements would pose big challenge before India. The amount of data collected for by UIDAI would be tremendous. Presently, India does not have either a legal framework or technical capabilities to accommodate the demands of the proposed functions of UIDAI.

The main aim of the proposed project by UID Project seems to be to strengthen the “E-Surveillance Capabilities” of India. With the passage of IT Act 2008 India has now officially become an endemic e-surveillance society. The amendments have provided unregulated, unconstitutional and arbitrary e-surveillance powers to Government of India and its agencies and instrumentalities. The fact is that India has become an E-Police State, states the ICT Trends of India 2009.

Privacy rights are valuable and must not be violated by the government under the garb of national security. An important question that has been raised in the past is whether the citizens have a right to self-defense against the State if the latter is violating their rights illegally? Private or self defense is a Human Right, Constitutional Rights as well as Statutory Right. The Indian citizens have a right to exercise self defense even against the State. This is more so in the sphere of ICT where there are least possibilities of human injuries. However the same can be exercised by law abiding citizens alone and criminals cannot claim this Constitutional Protection. The UIDAI Project must keep all these aspects in mind before being finally implemented in India.

SOURCE: GROUND REPORT