The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments to rule on whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution to all Indian citizens. The verdict will be divulged any day now, and it will surely be a crucial one – not only because privacy has become a primary debate in the Digital Age but also because of the intrinsic links between privacy and the government’s push to increase the mandate of Aadhaar and UIDAI.
Today, July 26, was the third hearing of right to privacy and four states – West Bengal, Puducherry, Karnataka and Punjab – moved the Supreme Court in support of declaring it a fundamental right in the Indian Constitution.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the four states, started the arguments before the nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar.
Senior Counsel Kapil sibal appearing for four states – Karnataka, West Bengal, Punjab and Puducherry
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
He talked about reasonable expectation of privacy and said that this expectation needs to stem from the Constitution. He added that privacy cannot be an absolute but a fundamental right and that the Court has to strike a balance to set limitations on discretional powers of the state.
KS: When state breaches right to privacy, they can only do so by law. There should be limitations on discretional powers of state.
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
He mentioned that right to privacy is a part of Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) of the Constitution.
The Attorney General (AG), representing the state refuted by saying that Article 21 is the shortest Article in the Constitution. He emphasised on “procedure established by law”.
AG: Procedure established by law means that the state can take away your rights. That’s why we have death penalty
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
AG: Privacy as a fundamental right was deliberately omitted by constitution makers
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
AG: Deprivation of a right is inherent under Article 21
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
The AG also said that right to privacy has more credibility in developed countries, but not India.
AG: Right to privacy has more credibility in developed countries that are socially, economically and politically developed, but not India.
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
Justice Chandrachud replied to the AG by saying that privacy is not an “elitist” right.
J. Chandrachud: Right to privacy is not an elitist right. It is for the masses as well. For example, many women below poverty line suffer
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
From cervical cancer due to reasons like multiple childbirth, early marriage etc. Can the state then do a forced sterilization? What stands
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
Between the state and these women then? It is the right to privacy.
— sflc.in (@SFLCin) July 26, 2017
The hearing is expected to continue for a considerable time and The Logical Indian hopes that the Court’s decision is such that the common citizens are protected.
Also read:
The Supreme Court Has Ruled On The Right To Privacy Twice Before; Here’s What It Said
