Right to privacy debate highlights: Petitioners complete arguments, SC to hear from Centre on Tuesday

A 9-judge bench hearing related to the Aadhaar card resumes after lunch, Attorney General KK Venugopal resumes submissions

#Aadhaar 9-judge bench hearing. Bench reassembles after lunch. AG KKV resumes his submissions. Thread.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 26, 2017

Union of India’s arguments in the right to privacy case in the morning session, so far 

Article 21 i.e. protections of life and personal liberty,  AK Gopalan ’s case and feasibility of the right to privacy being considered a fundamental right discussed. 

Thread on the Union of India's arguments in the right to privacy case in the morning session. https://t.co/ZykjIUkhiV

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 26, 2017

Updates for 26 July begin 

Four non-BJP ruled states, including Karnataka and West Bengal moved the Supreme Court seeking to intervene in the ongoing Right to Privacy hearing

Petitioners conclude arguments in Aadhar hearing, Attorney General KK Venugopal to commence submissions for Centre on Tuesday 

any way and let it develop case by case.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 20, 2017

Meenakshi Arora, the last counsel for petitioners, takes the Court through the judgement in District Registrar v Canara Bank. She concludes with the privacy of personal information and personal choice. 

With Meenakshi Arora’s statement, petitioners have completed their statement in their hearing on Thursday. Meenakshi Arora, the last petitioner, ends by saying, “History teaches us that without privacy, the consequences are unimaginable.”

MA concludes with the privacy of personal information and personal choice.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

MA: The right to privacy can be drawn from Articles 17, 24, and 25 of the Constitution.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

Privacy debate continues

The declaration that privacy is a fundamental right itself is the first step towards fulfilling that obligation of oversight on executive

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 20, 2017

In case you missed it: Right to privacy not absolute, says Supreme Court during Aadhaar hearing

#Aadhaar #hearing: #SupremeCourt says #privacy is not absolute, right is inherent in #Constitution- @MANJULtoons https://t.co/Q7WI7qvrug

— Firstpost (@firstpost) July 19, 2017

Povaya: Declaring privacy as a fundamental right is the first step towards ensuring accountability for coordinate branches of government.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

Justice Bobde discusses dark web with petitioner 

Justice Bobde asked petitioner over “dark web”, the large unknown part of internet. 

Povaya: The darkweb is an aberration.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

There's some discussion about proxy servers and Russia.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

Ah okay. Bobde J: This may not be relevant for this case, but we'll need to have answers for future cases.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

Litigant calls privacy as a matter of dignity than secrecy

Povaya: Secrecy is not the basis of privacy. Dignity is.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 20, 2017

Litigant invokes State’s Orwellian face

Makes a point that the thought of government may be watching itself is enough to cause a speech chill.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 20, 2017

Justice DY Chandrachud raises the question of private firms using big data

Chamleshwar adds whether there is an issue of privacy when the State induges in data collection. 

DYC J states how AI and Big data has progressed so much towards data explosion .. is it qualitatively different when State collects it?

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 20, 2017

Supreme Court hearing petitions on privacy in the digital world

Questioning a litigant over the privacy in the digital world, Justice Chamleshwar asked whether the issue of privacy pertains to the collection of data or its use. 

Chelameshwar J asks if the problem is of collection of data or its use? Where does the violation occurs.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 20, 2017

Updates for 20 July begins

Hearing concludes for the day, will continue tomorrow

Bench rises. To continue tomorrow.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 19, 2017

Justice Rohinton Nariman says court may analyse issue on a case-by-case basis

Rohinton: So, is it that we need to do case by case analysis each time, see what aspect of privacy it is? Counsels and other judges: yes

— Raman Chima (@tame_wildcard) July 19, 2017

Human rights activist and privacy advisor Ancilla on what right to privacy means to India

India has a population of 1.34 billion. If they lose their basic human right to privacy today, it will be a huge set back for the world

— Ancilla *flag here* (@ncilla) July 19, 2017

Shivam Divan, representing the petitioners in the court, on why Right to Privacy is important

Shyam Divan: My body belongs to me, invasions of my bodily integrity can only be allowed under a totalitarian regime. #Myprivacymyright

— Karuna Nundy (@karunanundy) July 19, 2017

What exactly does privacy entail, SC asks

Justice J Chandrachud asked senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing the petitioners, on what privacy entails. Every right to make a decision may not be a part of the right to privacy, the judge said.

Right to Privacy in European law

Europe generally is governed by the Data Protection Directive, which restricts how information can be processed and used. It requires that member states “implement technical and organisational measures to protect personal data against accidental or unlawful destruction or accidental loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure or access” and to establish judicial remedies for breaches. It also mandates the establishment of a public authority to monitor adherence to the directive.

Was the govt relying on an archaic 1954 judgment to make its point?

What would be the Union's stand on the issue of the existence of a fundamental right before the 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court ? (1/n)

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 19, 2017

Right to Privacy in the digital age

If in the digital age we do not have a fundamental right to privacy, any statute can be passed, and the citizen will have no recourse.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Right to Privacy in the US

The Privacy Act, 1974, is meant to protect individuals from unauthorised use of their records by a federal agency. It makes agencies accountable for the records they maintain and requires them to protect the accuracy of records. Agencies must also reveal the purpose for which are collecting information.

To read more, click here

What constitutes a fourth amendment violation?

Discusses the subsequent judgment that held that even a bugging device in a public telephone booth without a warrant is a 4th amndt violatio

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 19, 2017

Privacy in American, European laws

Justices J Chelameswar says degree of protection higher if it refers to a Constitution Part 3 right. He also further referenced the corresponding acts in American and European law, and its evolution from a common law to a human right.

Fundamental right to privacy a must in digital age: Divan

If in the digital age we do not have a fundamental right to privacy, any statute can be passed, and the citizen will have no recourse.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Privacy is an internationally recognised human right: Shyam Divan

CJI: The report says that privacy is a basic human right in international law.
SD: Yes. It is an internationally recognized human right.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Arguments to continue at 2 pm

Right to privacy: Gopal Subramanium, Soli Sorabjee, Shyam Divan appear for petitioner; Arguments to continue at 2 pm.

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) July 19, 2017

Right to privacy hearing will impact much more than Aadhaar

“The consequences are huge,” said constitutional scholar Menaka Guruswamy.

“This goes far beyond Aadhaar. The ruling will decide the manner in which constitutional democracy will endure.”

“If the court rules for the government, then it’s going to impact all kinds of footprints of citizens, both professionally, and in their private lives,” Guruswamy said.

“It will impact my right to my body, to what I do at home, my communications, and everything else.” — Reuters

Right to privacy is sacred; Govt must salvage UID scheme

Why is privacy such a big debate, especially in context of Aadhaar? Since the time of enrolling, a citizen offers his biometric data, address and a brief personal profile to the government. The fear, as highlighted by the privacy rights activists, is that the deep state will misuse this data to hunt down people they don’t like. That explains a number of pleas in the court to restrict the use of Aaadhar as a voluntary option and have stronger framework to protect the citizens from privacy invasions by the deep state.

Read the full article here .

Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium initiated the hearing before the bench headed by Chief Justice JS Khehar saying that the rights to life and liberty are pre-existing natural rights.

The nine-judge bench also comprises Justices J Chelameswar, SA Bobde, RK Agrawal, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Abhay Manohar Sapre, DY Chandrachud, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and S Abdul Nazeer.

The bench is dealing with the limited issue of right to privacy and matters challenging the Aadhaar scheme would be referred back to a smaller bench.

There are some preambular values which are to be read with fundamental rights, Subramanium said.

The preamble has multiplicity of expressions which include some from American Constitution and some from continental countries, he added.

“Liberty is the fundamental value of our Constitution. Life and liberty are natural existing rights which our Constitution has. Now can liberty be at all experienced without privacy. Can liberty be exercised without privacy at least with regard to all the Fundamental Rights of the Constitution,” he said.

The hearing is in progress. — PTI

GS: Article 21 makes the dignity of a citizen enforceable against the State. This means all the shades of dignity including privacy

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

There is a certain meaning to the qualification ‘fundamental’: Gopal Subramaniam

GS: There is a certain meaning to the qualification "fundamental" in part 3 rights. These are paramount.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 19, 2017

Who says you can’t have fun during a Supreme Court hearing?

LiveLaw  had reported that during the earlier hearing by the five-judge bench, Chief Justice of India JS Khehar had asked Attorney General KK Venugopal a question which made everyone crack up.

While discussing the Maneka Gandhi case, the CJI asked the attorney general how he could disagree with his father MK Nambiar. Venugopal must really have not seen that coming.

Gopal Subramaniam talks about four aspects of privacy

GS : there are four aspects of privacy - spatial , decisional, informational, and the right to develop your personality.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

‘Recognise what is already there’

GS : I am not saying, "expand Article 21." I am only saying, "recognise what is already there."

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Privacy is the essence of liberty: Gopal Subramaniam tells SC

GS : Privacy is not a penumbral right, or a right in the shade of other rights. Privacy is the essence of liberty.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Can your right over personal data be negotiated?

Life as we know is something more than one’s mere survival and existence; therefore, the right to privacy is an inherent right to every citizen of the country. As things stand today, where the Government of India is taking a stand that the right to privacy is not a fundamental right and at the same time the government is promoting digitalisation, enacting policies and regulations permitting surveillance in cyberspace, telephones, email, personal messages etc through multiple agencies under the grab of national security, implementing national programmes like Unique Identification Number etc, it is imperative for India to enact stringent privacy laws.

Read the full article here .

Even press freedom is not mentioned in Constitution but implied under freedom of speech: SC had said

“Even freedom of press is not explicit in the constitution but courts have interpreted right to free speech includes freedom of expression of press,” NDTV had quoted one of the judges in the Supreme Court as saying.

Chelameswar J: Are you saying that life and liberty are inalienable beyond the text of the Constitution? ADM Jabalpur observed the contrary

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017

Hearing begins

Life and liberty inherent in all human beings: Gopal Subramaniam

GS: Life and Liberty are not conferred by Constitution. They are inherent in all human beings. Preexisting.

— Prasanna S (@prasanna_s) July 19, 2017

GS : If liberty is a fundamental value of our Constitution, then privacy inheres in liberty.

— Gautam Bhatia (@gautambhatia88) July 19, 2017