Indian
Express: New Delhi: Friday, October 19, 2012.
An expert
group to draw the framework of a law to protect privacy of individuals has
suggested that issues of personal privacy must not be used to dilute the
provisions of or block information under the Right to Information Act, and used
a language that almost directly contradicts the sentiments expressed by the
Prime Minister in this regard just a few days ago.
The group headed by Justice (retd) A P Shah
has argued that the RTI Act already has provisions that protect the privacy,
and such types of information are exempt from public disclosure. “When applied,
the (proposed) Privacy Act should not circumscribe the Right to Information
Act,” the report of the expert group, which was made public on Thursday, said.
“Section 8 of
the (RTI) Act lists specific types of information that are exempted from public
disclosure in order to protect privacy. In this way, privacy is the narrow
exception to the Right to Information,” the report said.
Interestingly,
just earlier this week, while inaugurating an annual convention of information
commissioners, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had made the opposite argument.
“There is a fine balance required to be maintained between the Right to
Information and the right to privacy, which stems out of the Fundamental Right
to Life and Liberty,” he had said.
“The
citizens’ right to know should definitely be circumscribed if disclosure of
information encroaches upon someone’s personal privacy. But where to draw the
line is a complicated question,” he had said.
Sibngh’s
remarks had come at a time when questions were being asked about whether
government money had been spent on foreign trips and medical treatment of UPA
chairperson Sonia Gandhi. The government had clarified that no public money had
been spent on either of the two.
The expert
group under Justice Shah was constituted at the initiative of Minister of State
for Planning Ashwani Kumar after an attempt by the Department of Personnel and
Training (DoPT) last year to draft a privacy bill ended in a disaster. The
expert group was only asked to draw up the broad contours of what a privacy law
must comprise of. It has drawn from international experiences and presented nine
‘principles’ that must be accommodated in any future privacy law.
The group
also recognises that the constitutional basis of privacy as “a fundamental
right deriving from Article 21 of the Constitution of India”.
The report
deals mainly with how the extensive collection of personal data through
government institutions like Census, NATGRID, UID, or through private agencies
like banks, credit card companies or phone operators must be stored, managed
and eventually destroyed, if possible, without infringing on the privacy rights
of an individual.
The report
would now be referred to the DoPT which will then begin further consultation
processes to make a fresh start at drafting a privacy law.
Suggestions
ON TAPPING:
· The
expert group has said that the system of telephone and other communication
interception for security reasons has an “unclear regulatory regime that is
inconsistent, non-transparent, prone to misuse, and that does not provide
remedy or compensation to aggrieved individuals”. It has suggested the
following:
· All
orders of interceptions must be reported to a court within 15 days, disclosing
the reason for interception.
· All
interceptions must only be in force for 60 days, renewable up to a period of
180 days.
· Reasons
for interception order must be specified and recorded in writing by competent
authority.
· Records
of interception must be destroyed by security agencies after six months, or
nine months, and service providers must destroy records after two months, or
six months.
· All
interception orders must be sent for review by a designated committee.
· Officers
to whom information relating to interception can be disclosed must be
specified.
· Intermediaries
(like telephone operators) must ensure security, confidentiality and privacy of
intercepted material, and must be held legally responsible for any unauthorized
access or disclosure of intercepted material.
.JPG)
.JPG)
