Supreme court rejects the argument that privacy is an elite notion
Vidushi Marda | August 25, 2017
The year is 2017 and a nine-judge bench of the supreme court of India has unanimously upheld the fundamental right to privacy. In its 547-page judgment, the court recognises privacy as an element of human dignity, intrinsic to the constitutional guarantees of freedom, liberty and equal protection of laws.
This ruling comes at the heels of a controversial debate. Privacy has often been portrayed as a western construct imported to India by the elite. In this case, the government contended that the right to life of millions of poor Indians was of much greater importance than privacy concerns raised by the elite minority. It was also contended that privacy claims are made only by those who have done something wrong, channeling the ‘nothing to hide, nothing to fear’ trope.
This is closely connected to another popular claim: India is not a private nation, and Indians don’t care about their right to privacy, most formally articulated in 2010, when an Indian government approach paper for legislation on privacy stated, “India is not a particularly private nation. Personal information is often shared freely and without thinking twice. Public life is organized without much thought to safeguarding personal data. In fact, the public dissemination of personal information has over time, become a way of demonstrating the transparent functioning of the government.”
This historic judgment considers and ultimately rejects these lines of reasoning, debunking widely held notions of privacy in India. The argument of privacy being an elitist construct was found to be ‘unsustainable’ as every individual in society, irrespective of birth, is entitled to the autonomy and intimacy which privacy protects. Importantly, the court points out that arguments undermining civil and political rights for the poor are often used to carry out human rights violations under the pretense of a more urgent focus on economic well-being. Privacy represents one of the core freedoms of human existence, and the court acknowledges the various forms in which individuals have a legitimate expectation of privacy, in terms of communication, information, body, location and decisions.
Research from the Centre for Internet and Society (cited in the judgment) disproves the claim of India not being a ‘particularly private nation’ by demonstrating that aspects of privacy are in fact a traditional, Indian construct with firm grounding in Hindu and Islamic Law. According to the teachings of Shariah, for instance, every aspect of life is deemed to be private unless shown otherwise. Islamic law provides for privacy vis-a-vis one’s body, communication, information and territory. Similarly, the Manusmriti and Arthashastra under Hindu law recognise aspects of bodily, territorial, and informational privacy. In light of these findings, the court’s reasoning is particularly significant as it accounts for India’s cultural approaches to privacy and harmonizes them with the constitutional right.
This recognition of privacy as a fundamental, inalienable right has significant implications for a number of issues pending before the supreme court, including most prominently the proceedings concerning Aadhaar and the decriminalisation of homosexuality. The judgment also recognises the right to privacy having both vertical and horizontal application, i.e., the right to privacy vis-a-vis state and non-state actors, which is particularly significant in the age of big data. While the task ahead is arguably more important than this single judgment, to quote justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul: There is hope!
Marda is programme officer at the Centre for Internet and Society; Policy Advisor and Internet of Rights Fellow at Article19. Views expressed here are personal.
An underground rapper who grew up on Mumbai streets, Divine spins his music around his environment and poverty. His breakout single, ‘Meri Gully Mein’, along with fellow rapper Naezy caught Bollywood’s attention. The Hindi film ‘Gully Boy’ is inspired by their lives and gr
Anil Swarup, an IAS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre who retired in 2018, is a model bureaucrat who retained his optimism right till the end of service and exemplified dedication and commitment. His excitement at the opportunities that a job in the IAS provided is evident on every page of his new book publis
The question of reform of the civil services has been debated extensively at all levels at least over the last five to six decades after independence. Indeed, it was soon perceived that the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) may not be well equipped to deal with the problems of an emerging developing coun
Shouting vengeance at all and sundry while wriggling out of holes of our own making seems to be our very special national characteristic. Some recent instances are illustrative of this attribute. A number of business tycoons with thousands of crores of unresolved debts have fled abroad with the government
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) came into existence, based on a Resolution of the home ministry, dated April 1, 1963 – a sheer coincidence that it also happens to be April Fool’s day. Over the past few months, we have seen the CBI live up to its founding day with great zeal, being i
Gujarat was passing through a turbulent phase in the 1980s. The decade began middle class agitations against new reservation policies, and the caste friction turned communal under the watch of chief minister Madhavsinh Solanki, alienating majority of urban population on both counts. The ground was ripe for