English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Government hails SC verdict on Right to Privacy; underscores the point that it is not an absolute right

Published

on

Government hails SC verdict on Right to Privacy; underscores the point that it is not an absolute right

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]~By Rajesh Sinha

Smarting under the blow from Supreme Court’s verdict declaring Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right, which it had hotly contested, the Centre’s reaction still focused on the aspect of “no right is absolute”.

Quoting from the judgment, a press release from the Ministry of Law and Justice said: “The Government is of the clear opinion that its legislations are compliant with the tests laid down in the judgement. The Supreme court has stated that “…requires a careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legitimate concerns of the State. The legitimate aims of the State would include for instance protecting national security, preventing and investigating crime, encouraging innovation and the spread of knowledge, and preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits.”

The government said it is committed to this object – and there lies the nub. This interpretation leaves the door open to encroachment on the right for questionable goals.

Critics say the Aadhaar ID cards link enough data to create a comprehensive profile of a person’s spending habits, their friends and acquaintances, the property they own and a trove of other information.

Aadhaar was originally meant to be a secure form of digital identification for citizens. But as it was rolled out, concerns arose about privacy, data security and recourse for citizens in the face of data leaks and other issues. Over time, Aadhaar was made mandatory for income tax returns and operating bank accounts. Companies also started pushing to gain access to Aadhaar details of customers. Opponents say that its use for what are effectively essential services means their right to privacy is increasingly being violated.

There were other concerns as well. First, making Aadhar mandatory for delivering services and ‘preventing dissipation of social service benefits’ is an intrusion into privacy for administrative convenience or to cover administrative inefficiency. If the government machinery is inefficient, should it encroach on Fundamental Rights? The court does say “preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits” is a “legitimate aim of the State” to restrict the right.

Second, it is doubtful if making Aadhaar mandatory would enhance security. There have been instances of terrorists being found with Aadhaar cards. No instances have been reported of an Aadhaar card leading to a terrorist. On the other hand, making Aadhaar mandatory for various services, bank accounts, mobile phones etc makes it possible for any agency to access all kinds of information about an individual it wants to target and harass. Any individual whom an agency wants to target would be vulnerable to harassment. Even a notice seeking explanation is a harassment for the ordinary citizen, even if it does not involve any crime or offence and does not lead to prosecution or penalty.

The government appeared keen to retain its powers in this regard. Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad read from the judgments of the different judges on the Supreme Court bench to underscore that they acknowledged privacy “is not an absolute right, it must be subject to some reasonable restrictions.”

Contrary to what the government had argued in the court, he said the government’s view is consistent that right to privacy should be fundamental. He said the “essence of today’s judgment” validated what Arun Jaitley, then Law Minister, had told Parliament in 2016. “Much before the creation of the nine-judge bench, the government, while moving the Aadhaar Act had clearly acknowledged that Right to Privacy is fundamental, flowing from Article 21,” the minister said.

Prasad added that it is “unknown in civilised existence that a government was seeking to collect data of its countrymen without the authority of law”.

On the benefits of Aadhaar, Shankar claimed the government has saved Rs 57,000 crore through validation. “Aadhar validates information for 3 crore people every day. The world is marvelling at this technology. It is completely homegrown. Should be proud,” he said.

In its press statement, Union Ministry of Law and Justice said: “The Government welcomes the view of the Supreme Court, which is consistent with all the necessary safeguards that the Government has been ensuring in its legislative proposals which had been approved by Parliament.”

The Modi government statement was more of a political comment as it sought to attack the previous government: “The issue of personal liberty had a chequered history during the previous Congress Governments. Immediately after the Constitution was framed, the Congress Government at the Centre had consistently maintained that personal liberty could be denied to an individual by any legislation irrespective of the reasonableness of that legislation. The Congress Governments had consistently argued that privacy was not a part of any constitutional guarantees. In fact, during the internal emergency when Article 21 was suspended, the Central Government had argued before the Supreme Court that a person could be killed and deprived even his life (let alone liberty) and he would still be remediless.”

“The UPA Government had introduced AADHAR scheme without any legislative support. It was in that context that the question of the UPA’s AADHAR scheme was challenged before the judiciary. The NDA Government ensured that necessary legislation was approved by Parliament. Adequate safeguards were also introduced.”

“… the UPA Government created an AADHAR without any legislative support. The present Government did exactly the opposite. It gave a legislative support to AADHAR and incorporated in law special safeguards with regard to privacy. It has also assured the Supreme Court that it will soon be coming out with a data protection law for which a committee headed by Justice Sri Krishna, a retired judge of the Supreme Court, had already been appointed.”

The government reiterated, “The judgement reads that personal liberty is not an absolute right but liable to the restrictions provided in the Constitution which will be examined on a case to case basis.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Akhilesh Yadav says BJP orchestrated Sambhal violence to cover up byelection malpractice

He said that impartial investigations would reveal that many voters were unable to cast their ballots and that someone else had fraudulently voted in their place.

Published

on

Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav on Sunday accused the BJP government of orchestrating the violence in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal district during a mosque survey, claiming it was a ploy to distract from electoral malpractice.

Yadav, the former chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, also alleged incidents of electronic booth capturing during the recently concluded bypolls for nine Assembly seats in the state, suggesting that a forensic examination of the electronic voting machines (EVMs) by the Election Commission could provide clarity on the situation.

Earlier in the day, the Uttar Pradesh Police used tear gas to disperse the crowd after it got violent and started stone pelting as tension escalated during a second survey of the Mughal-era mosque, claimed to be originally the site of an ancient Hindu temple. At least ten people were detained following the violent clash.

The local administration said that a second survey, led by an “Advocate Commissioner” as part of a court-mandated examination of the disputed area, commenced around 7 AM, attracting a gathering crowd.

Yadav made the statement a day after the results of the UP bypolls, where the Samajwadi Party secured only two seats, while the BJP and its ally, the RLD, won seven, including the Kundarki seat, which has a significant Muslim population.

“A serious incident took place in Sambhal, where a survey team was intentionally sent in the morning to disrupt election discussions. Their goal was to create chaos and prevent any debate on election-related issues,” Yadav claimed.

He said that several individuals were injured in the Sambhal violence, with one fatality, and questioned the need for a new survey conducted without proper preparation, especially when a previous survey had already been completed.

The Samajwadi Party chief said, “I won’t delve into legalities, but the other side wasn’t given a fair hearing. This was clearly designed to incite emotions and distract from conversations about electoral fraud.”

Yadav asserted that the events in Sambhal were a deliberate act by the BJP to divert attention from the alleged electoral irregularities. “In a true democracy, victory should come from the people, not the system. The kind of democracy the BJP is establishing ensures that the system prevails over the voters,” he stated.

He said that impartial investigations would reveal that many voters were unable to cast their ballots and that someone else had fraudulently voted in their place.

He charged that on election day, the police and administration removed nearly all of the Samajwadi Party’s booth agents and many supporters eager to vote. “If voters were shut out, who actually cast the votes? If our party’s votes didn’t reach those booths and our candidate received no support, then who voted there? This is a serious concern,” he said.

Yadav also pointed out discrepancies with polling slips, alleging the presence of both red-marked and regular slips, which he claimed led to discriminatory practices on voting day. Haji Rizwan, the Samajwadi Party candidate for Kundarki, echoed the same claims, stating that his supporters faced barriers to voting. BJP’s Ramveer Singh won the Kundarki bypoll by a notable margin of over 145,000 votes.

Yadav said that a victory gained through deceit is nothing but an illusion that ultimately burdens those who orchestrated it. “This entire act has been staged by the BJP. Such a victory only morally weakens those who achieve it and dulls their conscience,” he said.

He questioned how one can uphold democracy when the government and administration themselves engage in oppression. “This dishonesty is not a new phenomenon. Election rigging has become their standard operating procedure, and the evidence has been captured on camera. Even an MLA faced humiliation,” the former chief minister alleged.

Continue Reading

India News

Former CJI Chandrachud removed fear of law from political defectors, claims Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut

 “If he would have given a timely verdict in disqualification petition of Shiv Sena (UBT), the scenario in Maharashtra would have been different. History will never forgive him,” he said. 

Published

on

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut on Sunday criticised former Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, accusing him of undermining the rule of law for politicians who switched parties in Maharashtra.

This statement from Raut follows his party’s disappointing performance in the recent state Assembly elections, where they secured only 20 out of the 95 seats contested within the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance. The results for the alliance’s partners were similarly poor, with Congress winning 16 of 101 seats and the NCP (SP) claiming just 10 of the 86 seats they contested for.

Raut asserted that by failing to rule on the disqualification petitions, Chandrachud enabled defections to occur freely.

Speaking to reporters, Raut said: “Chandrachud has eradicated the fear of the law among defectors. His actions will be remembered negatively in history.”

After the split of the Shiv Sena in 2022, the faction led by Uddhav Thackeray filed petitions in the Supreme Court seeking the disqualification of MLAs who defected to join Eknath Shinde. The Supreme Court subsequently assigned the responsibility to the Assembly Speaker, who earlier this year ruled that the Shinde-led faction represented the real political party.

Raut said the result of the Maharashtra Assembly election 2024 could have been different if Chandrachud had not delayed the decisions regarding disqualification petitions.

 “If he would have given a timely verdict in disqualification petition of Shiv Sena (UBT), the scenario in Maharashtra would have been different. History will never forgive him,” he said. 

“The choice of Maharashtra’s Chief Minister will be dictated by the Gujarat lobby. Perhaps the swearing-in ceremony should take place in Gujarat instead of Maharashtra,” he said. Additionally, Raut credited the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for their role in the success of the Mahayuti coalition, alleging that their aggressive campaigning techniques significantly influenced the election results.

Continue Reading

India News

At all-party meet, Congress demands discussion on Adani, Manipur in Parliament winter session

The winter session of Parliament is scheduled to continue until December 20, with no sessions planned for November 26 in observance of Constitution Day.

Published

on

In the customary all-party meeting convened by the government ahead of the winter session of Parliament on Sunday, the Congress demanded that the BJP-led central government discuss allegations against the Adani Group and the Manipur violence.

Congress leader Pramod Tiwari said that his party demanded discussions on issues such as the Adani Group bribery allegations, the Manipur crisis, pollution, and train accidents in the parliamentary session, which is starting on Monday.

Union Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Kiren Rijiju announced during a press conference that an all-party meeting was held to discuss the upcoming winter session of Parliament. A total of 42 political representatives were present, consisting of 30 party leaders and party floor leaders, each contributing their suggestions, he added.

Rijiju stated that these suggestions would be reviewed with the business advisory committee and the Speakers of both Houses to determine which issues would be addressed in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. He emphasised the desire for constructive and peaceful discussions in both Houses.

Speaking to the media after the meeting, Congress leader Gaurav Gogoi highlighted several key issues raised by the Congress and the INDIA alliance during the meeting. He pointed out that a significant concern was the financial sector scam recently highlighted by the US government, urging the BJP-led NDA government to provide clear answers regarding the matter.

Regarding the issues discussed, AAP leader Sanjay Singh noted that corruption related to the Adani group was damaging India’s global reputation and warranted further discussions.

He also mentioned the ongoing violence in Manipur, which has persisted for a year and a half without government intervention. Additionally, Singh said he raised concerns about irregularities during the Uttar Pradesh bypolls, where voters faced intimidation, questioning the integrity of the electoral process.

Singh expressed skepticism about the government’s claim to implement the Waqf Bill without awaiting the Joint Parliamentary Committee’s report.

SAD leader Harsimrat Kaur Badal said she brought to attention several issues concerning farmers, stating that they are being exploited by a central government, receiving less than the minimum support price (MSP) for their crops.

She noted that a significant percentage of DAP fertiliser supplied by the Centre is reportedly fake, and highlighted concerns regarding land transfers to Haryana in Chandigarh, which violate the Punjab Reorganization Act.

In the meeting, Badal also criticised the forced acquisition of farmland for the Bharatmala Expressway and suggested that there may be a collaborative effort between the Centre and the Opposition to stall House proceedings, emphasising that the responsibility to manage the House lies with the government.

The Congress party, which is the largest Opposition party in the House, is expected to prioritise discussions on the situation in the Northeast, the ongoing border tensions at the Line of Actual Control, and allegations surrounding businessman Gautam Adani.

The government has prepared 16 bills for consideration, including the Waqf Amendment Bill, which is under review by the Joint Parliamentary Committee.

Moreover, there may be discussions regarding the contentious ‘One Nation, One Election’ proposal, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi has supported as a means to optimise resources and enhance democracy, although it has faced opposition from Congress.

The winter session of Parliament is scheduled to continue until December 20, with no sessions planned for November 26 in observance of Constitution Day.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com