Indian Express: Mumbai: Friday, August 25, 2017.
The Supreme
Court’s decision holding that the right to privacy is a fundamental right was
hailed across sections of the society here. However, many felt the decision
should now pave the way for the court to strike down government mandates
requiring citizens to link their Aadhaar card to various government services
and schemes. Others felt the court ruling will act as a safeguard for
individual choices and sexual orientation.
“The Supreme
Court has reiterated a very settled principle and given it a seal of approval.
A fundamental issue has finally been resolved particularly in context of new
technology and invasion of privacy through various other means. It has set to
naught any attempt by the government to intrude the private lives of citizens.
Such an interpretation of Right to Life is the need of the hour,” said retired
judge of the Bombay High Court V M Kanade.
“That the
right to privacy is a fundamental one is a universal fact and India is no
exception. Therefore, the Supreme Court judgment is welcome,” said Avatthi
Ramaiah, professor at the Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policy, Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
He, however,
said there needs to be clarity on the interpretation of the judgment with
regards to the Aadhaar card. “The Aadhaar database comprises essential private
details of individuals. While there are several benefits of Aadhaar card, it
can also be misused and lead to breach of privacy. Whether it will be mandatory
for financial transactions is yet to be seen,” said Ramaiah.
Farmers
Farmers in
Maharashtra who are grappling with the state government’s order to make it
mandatory for them to link the 7/12 extracts, which denotes a person’s right
over a said piece of land with their Aadhaar cards, hope the order will have a
bearing on whether they are required to divulge this information.
“As of now
the verdict does not seem to have a direct bearing on our sector. However, we
hope that it will have some bearing on the Aadhaar card hearing that is
expected to be given by the SC. This government has made it mandatory for
farmers to link their Aadhaar cards to land records to avail state benefits. It
was just a ploy to keep as many farmers out of the ambit of the announced loan
waiver,” said Keshav Kakad, an agricultural activist from Niphad in Nashik
district.
“This
provision did cause a lot of hardship to farmers. Why did they need Aadhaar
when we are submitting our land records to the state. We do not know how much
today’s decision would impact our lives but the requirement for Aadhaar for
every small thing is really creating problems for people,” said Sachin Bodke a
farmer from Sakri in Dhule.
Activists
Anil Joseph,
a citizen activist and resident of Bandra, pointed out that apart from Aadhaar,
this verdict would positively impact other laws as well. “The Supreme Court’s
verdict will have a bearing on other laws governing LGBT rights and even cyber
laws. While the right to privacy has always been an unsaid rule, as a common
citizen, it is good to hear that the Supreme Court has now recognised it. The
ruling will force the government agencies which collect data from people to be
more careful and ensure that it is not leaked,” he said.
Other
activists like Right to Information activist Kamlakar Shenoy and citizen
activist and member of AGNI Nikhil Desai felt the government has been asking
for “too much information” to be linked to Aadhaar card and the SC ruling can
keep a check on it. “The Aadhaar card has no confidentiality and who should one
blame when people’s private details, which includes bank details, contact
details and other documents, are stolen,” said Shenoy.
Right To
Privacy Is A Fundamental Right, Says SC
Recently, the
Maharashtra government appealed to the apex court to allow police to inspect
homes of citizens on suspicion of beef possession. The Supreme Court verdict on
Thursday, however, has brought hope to several beef eaters, broadening the
scope of being able to take a decision to their right to eat what they want.
“It is okay to check trucks and godowns for beef. But it is a breach of privacy
when police enters a house to inspect my refrigerator. What I do or have in my
house is a personal matter unless I am breaking the law. We are happy with the
SC verdict. It may affect the government’s appeal to infringe upon privacy of
people for checking beef,” said Mohammed Ali Qureshi, president of Mumbai
Suburban Beef Dealers Association.
Traders,
however, believe it may have little impact on incidents of gau rakshaks
stopping trucks to inspect if they are transporting beef illegally.
LGBTQ
community
Meanwhile,
the right to privacy, recognised as a fundamental right, has also been hailed
as a progressive move by LGBTQ community. On Thursday, the nine-judge bench
said in its verdict that privacy includes preservation of personal intimacies,
home and sexual orientation.
Sushil, 38,
attached with Six Degrees which is a professional networking community of LGBTQ
community, feels Thursday’s verdict may force validity of Section 377 that
criminalises homosexuality to be re-examined. “We should not be held as
criminals because of our sexual orientation. If it is consensual, why should
people like me be forced to keep it under wraps,” Sushil said.
He added that
while a sub-sect of society knows about his sexual orientation, such verdicts
will help the entire nation to accept LGBTQ community without bias. “This is a
remarkable judgment, because it speaks about people at large and not of one
group in silo. I can be gay and eat beef, and the SC has recognised my right to
be the way I am,” said Harish Iyer, activist fighting for rights of homosexuals
and transgenders. “While this verdict is progressive, it is a long journey
before the constitution recognises rights of homosexuals,” he said.
Data
protection
ADGP Sanjay
Pandey said, “Legally speaking, with this pronouncement violation of privacy
can now be enforced through intervention of high courts and the Supreme Court.
While allowing reasonable restrictions by the state which are justifiable, it
seeks a robust data protection regime. This will help India’s stature
internationally in information technology.”
For social
media network companies sharing of persons data for any other use may not be
possible. For law enforcement agencies surveillance unless it is “fair just and
reasonable” may not be possible. This will include monitoring phones email etc,
he said.
M N Singh,
former Mumbai Police Commissioner, said, “We are not a police state and
therefore one should not view the judgment from a narrow prism of policing. The
SC judgment is welcomed by everyone. It will be implemented with reasonable
restrictions and therefore as far as police or policing is concerned it should
not matter. There are apprehensions that it might affect the investigations of
cyber crime but I don’t agree with it.”
Vijay
Kuvalekar, retired chief information commissioner, termed it as a landmark
judgment stating that individual privacy has now got constitutional protection.
“Now, it has to be seen how it will implemented in the RTI Act as some cases
the information related to caste certificate, pay slips, etc is referred as
personal information,” said Kuvalekar.
He said the
SC judgment does not impact government plans of using Aadhaar for welfare
schemes. “It should not be used to stall the welfare schemes meant for poor. A
balance should be maintained,” he added.
“Given the
political environment in the country, and the push for making Aadhaar card
compulsory, the Supreme Court’s verdict was unexpected. It is a big win because
this will now give precedence to further arguments on Aadhaar, freedom of
speech and internet regulations,” said Jay Vyas, a final year Masters student
of College of Social Work, Nirmala Niketan.