Thread

On Parliament
@IFFonParliament

The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 is set

to be taken up for consideration today in Parliament!
We are tracking the bill so watch this space for live
updates.

@AmitShah

See here for IFF’s briefing on the Bill -

Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) @internetfreedom · 1 Apr
Starting in 10

Join IFF’s briefing on the Criminal Procedure Identification Bill, 2022 as we

discuss the issues that arise from the proposed bill.

twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1…

2:53 pm · 4 Apr 2022 · Twitter Web App

7 Retweets 3 Quote Tweets 11 Likes

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 6h
Replying to @IFFonParliament
The Bill was introduced by @AmitShah a few minutes ago in Lok Sabha. He
stated that the Bill was introduced after consultations held with the States.
He also said that he acknowledged the concerns raised against the Bill.
(2/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 6h
@AmitShah mentioned that a Model Vision Manual was being developed by
the Government which will address all the concerns raised so far. However,
he added that the manual was not presented with the Bill in the Parliament
as it is still under consideration. (3/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 6h
@ManishTewari raised opposition against the Bill. Referring to the 1920
version of the Bill, he said that the Bill was first introduced by the colonial
government to threaten and silence the freedom fighters. (4/n)

1 2 7

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Further, he stated that the Bill went against the ‘golden triangle’ of the
Constitution, i.e., Art. 14, 19 and 21. He even referred to the Supreme
Court’s ruling in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, citing the laying
down of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution (5/n)
1 4

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Among major concerns raised, the MP highlighted the vagueness and
arbitrariness of the terminology used in the Bill. Laying emphasis on the
fundamental rights of prisoners, he threw light on the concerning
implications of the Bill. (6/n)

1 3

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
While Shah mentioned that a Pre-legislative Consultation Policy had been
conducted, Tewari observed that, to the best of his knowledge, no such
consultation was held with civil society. He called for fresh consultation
and review by a standing committee. (7/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Lastly, he remarked that the introduction of this bill in the absence of a
data protection legislation is in clear violation of the Justice K. S.
Puttaswamy vs Union Of India ruling of the Supreme Court which enshrined
the right to privacy as a fundamental right. (8/n)

1 4

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
.@vishnumppalamu spoke next, taking note of the benefits that may be
availed by investigation agencies’ officers and the potential for improving
conviction rates. He stressed on the need to update the 1920 Act, which
was already very delayed in his opinion. (9/n)
 1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
He noted the expansion of the boundaries and modus operandi of crime,
stating that criminals have now also started using new techniques. Thus, he
stressed on the need to equip investigative agencies with the right scientific
tools. (10/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Pronouncing that the Bill does not contravene Art. 20, he said that the term
‘witness’ needs to be viewed against the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. While
acknowledging that right to privacy is for everyone, he stated that it is ‘not
absolute’ & is ‘subject to restrictions’. (11/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
.@Dayanidhi_Maran spoke next, calling the bill ‘anti-people’. He accused
the incumbent government of cherry picking the colonial bills they wish to
change. He stated that the Bill goes against the fundamental right of
privacy of the citizens. (12/n)
On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Further, the MP called this Bill an ‘attack against federalism’. He referred to
@AmitShah’s opposition to the Union taking away state’s powers when the
latter was the Home Minister of Gujarat. (13/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Mr. Maran, while speaking about the new Data Protection Bill that is yet to
be tabled in Parliament, questioned the reason behind rushing the Bill. He
emphasised that any bill that collects data must comply with the Right to
Privacy Judgement. (14/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Stating that the incumbent government is known to target the minorities, he
voiced his concern that this bill will be used to further attack them. He
accused the government of using the debate around fuel price rise to derail
the conversation around the bill. (15/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
Addressing the over-broad provisions in the Bill, he stated that it contains
the first step towards creating a police state. He accused the Bill of giving
expansive powers to the Union Government, especially when it was already
spying on citizens. (16/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
He raised his concern around the use of the Bill to surveil individuals who
protest against this gov. He too stressed the urgency for tabling the Data
Protection Bill, 2021. He asked the Government to explain how they intend
to protect data collected under this bill. (17/n)

1 2
On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
He stressed that the citizens need confirmation that their data will not be
misused or sold. Lastly, he requested that the due process of law be
followed, the Bill not be rushed and that it be referred to a standing
committee. (18/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 5h
.@MahuaMoitra expressed her concern regarding the bill being misused like
UAPA. She too stressed on the fact that this law is being discussed in the
absence of any data protection law, something which India is in a dire need
of. (19/n)

1 1 5

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Addressing the lack of safeguards and unconstitutionality of the Bill, she
stressed on the need to regulate the expansion of powers held by the Union
Govt. She raised concern around the provision which includes those under
preventive detention under the scope of this Bill. (20/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Mentioning that the average life expectancy is 69.6 years, she voiced her
concern as the Bill allows data collection for 75 years. She further stated
that this Bill violates the principle of purpose limitation. (21/n)
 1 3

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Citing the increasing number of sedition cases being filed in India, she
feared that the bill would be misused to take the data of protestors. While
concluding, she requested the Home Minister to send the Bill to a standing
committee. (22/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
The next speaker was @vinayakraut15, who affirmed the need to refer the
Bill in a standing committee, for further discussion. He proclaimed that the
Bill will infringe upon the right to privacy and other fundamental rights.
(23/n)

1 3

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
The MP spoke about how the Bill provides discretionary power even to
police constables for harassing citizens. He noted that different political
leaders participate in protests, and even their data may be collected under
the bill on arbitrary grounds. (24/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Next, @PVMidhunReddy1 said that the bill should not be used as a means
for targeting political prisoners. He requested the Government to assuage
concerns and refrain from using the bill for a ‘political witch hunt’. (25/n)

1 3

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Similar to his counterparts, he stressed that the data collected under the
bill should not be misused. Concluding his statement, he expressed his
support for the Bill. (26/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
.@MPBhartruhari maintained that the Bill must meet the test of
constitutional proportionality, which it currently doesn’t. He further raised
concern about the Bill having the potential to create a comprehensive
profile of all citizens. (27/n)
 1 3

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
He recognised that the Data Protection Bill & the DNA Bill are still pending
before the Gov, despite the respective committees submitting their reports.
Expressing concerns over privacy & security of citizen’s data, he stressed
for safeguards against misuse of data. (28/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
.@supriya_sule proclaimed that the Bill violates Article 20 & 21 as well as
the right to be forgotten. Stressing on the need for ensuring that data is not
misused, she asked the Home Minister to address the various concerns
raised by the opposition. (29/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
Next person to raise concerns was @KDanishAli who questioned the
intentions of the Home minister to create a police state. In the absence of a
Data Protection Bill, he asked who will be responsible if data is misused.
(30/n)
 1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
He accused the Government of wanting to stifle those who protest and
raise questions against the government on the grounds of human rights.
Finally, he requested that Bill be taken to a standing committee. (31/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 4h
.@GauravGogoiAsm said that the bill must be evaluated on its possible use,
while keeping in mind the past record of the current Government. At the
outset, Mr. Gogoi stated that this bill must be discussed comprehensively in
a standing committee. (32/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
He referred to the high level of acquittals and undertrials in the Court, as
well as fatigue among the police who are often overworked and underpaid.
Despite such a scenario, he stated that it is unfortunate that a Bill to
1
strengthen 1 (33/n)
the infrastructure is not introduced.

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
He expressed his regret that a politicised bill is being introduced, that can
be used as a weapon against the opposition. Calling it executive overreach,
he said the powers of the Magistrate is much more than that given in the
1920 Act & the 87th Law Commission report. (34/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
He said that the introduction of the Bill must not be justified with the
existence of similar international legislations as India is yet to strengthen its
infrastructure. To substantiate this argument, he gave the example of
AFSPA. (35/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
.@dr_satyapal spoke next, asking for support for the Bill in a collective fight
against criminals. Stating that India’s current conviction rate is as low as
14.5%, he declared that the Bill will ensure that innocent people aren’t
convicted. (36/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
He justified the use of multiple measurements in the Bill, stating that one
measurement is often not enough to convict criminals. Answering the
concerns raised on the misuse of laws, he asked his counterparts to state
an instance in history when a law was not misused. (37/n)
1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
Lastly, while voicing his support for the Bill, he said that the police, if
empowered with technology, will be able to protect those on the margins of
the society. (38/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
Next, @BasheerEt said that it is the Government’s intention to create
enmity amongst the people through this Bill. He expressed that the
Government is spoiling the principle of equality before law and asked that
the bill be sent to the standing committee of Parliament. (39/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
N K Premachandran, who spoke next, said that the Bill is very contentious
and is in violation of constitutional and human rights principles. He iterated
the need for the Bill to go through the parliamentary standing committee.
(40/n)
 1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
Concluding his statement, he pointed out the excessive delegation under
Clause 8 of the Bill and called it unconstitutional. Further, he stated that it
takes away the democratic rights of the people of this country. (41/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
Expressing his opposition to the Bill, @SUBBARAYANK3 called it draconian.
Next, @imtiaz_jaleel stated his objection towards the Bill, stating that the
Government is bringing in a law without respecting the right to privacy and
right against self-incrimination. (42/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
.@AprajitaSarangi said that technology is capable of helping police officers
in many cases which suffer from lack of evidence. She claimed that
comprehensive consultations had been conducted before introducing the
Bill. (43/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 3h
.@OP_Ravindranath thanked the Home Minister for undertaking
modernisation of the police force. He expressed his support for the Bill
stating that “new age crime needs new age policies”. (44/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
.@BrijendraSpeaks stated his support for the Bill & called the 1920 Act
inadequate. He encouraged the use of tech in the criminal justice system.
He said that many private and govt. bodies currently already have a lot of
data & so mustn't restrict the police from using it. (45/n)

1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
.@navneetravirana claimed that those who are scared usually have
something to hide and are thus protesting this Bill. She stated that without
new technology, the country cannot progress. Further, she said that
through this Bill, the Govt. is working towards reducing crime. (46/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
Stating that the Bill takes away the rights of citizens, @SaugataRoyMP
requested the Home Minister to refer the Bill to the standing committee. He
requested the removal of ambiguity & addressal of concerns about its
misuse. He called the Bill draconian. (47/n)
 1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
.@nishikant_dubey referring to the creation of UIDAI stated that the
Congress did not pay much heed to privacy when it created a UID. He
further stated that this Bill will allow the protection of women and children,
& prevent terrorist activities. (48/n)

1 1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
.@adhirrcinc said that the Bill is a serious infringement upon individual
freedom and liberty. He accused the Government of profiling citizens.
Saying that “hadbadi will cause gadbadi”, he requested that the Bill be sent
to a standing committee. (49/n)
 1 1

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
Home Minister @AmitShah, responding to the concerns raised in Lok Sabha
today, said that the bill has not been introduced for any harmful purpose.
Defending the Bill, he said that this bill will serve to protect the human
rights of all law abiding citizens of India. (50/n)

1 1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
He accused the opposition of relying on ‘selective quotes’ from Supreme
Court judgements. He claimed that as times and nature of crime change,
police techniques must also change. He urged the need to assist the police
in efforts to counter next generation crimes. (51/n)

1 2
On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
Amit Shah continues the discussion on the Criminal Procedure
(Identification) Bill, 2022. We continue to track the debate and will keep
you updated on any significant developments. Stay tuned. (52/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 2h
We would like to thank @PRSLegislative and @_maadhyam_ for their deep
analysis, commentary and live updates on the Parliament. Follow them for
more such useful content. (53/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 1h
Voting on the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 has commenced
in Lok Sabha. (54/n)

1 2

On Parliament @IFFonParliament · 1h
The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022 has been passed by voice
vote in Lok Sabha. (55/n)

2 4

SAI@SAA @sainairv · 1h
Replying to @IFFonParliament and @internetfreedom
Just saw HM on to it ..wat is that man reading out and I shuffled channel
can't take his utterances..