PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE

INTRODUCTION

“Privacy is not an option, and it shouldn't be the price we accept for just getting on the
Internet.”
The general concept of privacy uses the theory of natural rights and has now attempted to
respond to new forms of digital ICT. Privacy refers to an individual's right to control their
personal information and activities. It encompasses aspects such as personal data,
communication, and freedom from intrusion

The right to privacy is explicitly stated under Article 12 of the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights- ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his
privacy, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks’

SURVEILLANCE – A NATIONAL SECURITY NEXUS

In democracies, information flow is crucial, distinguishing them from other regimes.
However, interpretations of 'legitimate secrecy' vary, especially in the digital age. While
essential, secrecy conflicts with citizens' demand for transparency.
Not all secrets relate to national security; some hide mismanagement. During conflicts,
leaders may use national security tactics to deceive the public. Examples from Canada and
Norway illustrate secrecy abuses in democracies, revealing surveillance and cover-ups.
Leaders in democracies face a dilemma, needing public consent for policies. Democratic
leaders can manipulate public opinion, but any revealed tactics come with significant costs,
including legal consequences.

THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY UNDER SURVEILLANCE ALLOWANCES IN

INDIA
In India, internet surveillance is governed by the Information Technology Act, 2000. This
legislation grants the government authority, under Section 69, to conduct internet data
surveillance in the interest of the nation. The Information Technology (Procedure and
Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009, outline
the procedural aspects related to such surveillance.

Section 69 permits the interception, monitoring, and decryption of digital information for
India's sovereignty, integrity, and other national interests. It also includes provisions for
surveillance during a public emergency or for public safety, expanding the powers
considerably. Regarding consent for personal data collection, Rule 5 of the IT Rules 2011
mandates written consent, but this applies narrowly to sensitive personal data, limiting its
scope.

A positive development for privacy protection comes from the High Court of Bombay in
Vinit Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2019). The court emphasized that
interception of phone calls and tapping cannot be justified without risking public safety. This
judgment curtails the discretionary powers of surveillance authorities, reducing the potential
for unjustified data interception under broad discretion.

Notable developments:
1. The Supreme Court of India issued a landmark judgment in the case of Justice K.S.
Puttaswamy v. Union of India, recognizing the right to privacy as a fundamental right
under the Constitution of India. Also the Aadhar Case under same name.
2. The ban on Chinese apps: In 2020, the Indian government banned several Chinese mobile
apps, citing concerns over national security and data privacy. The ban included popular
apps such as TikTok, WeChat, and UC Browser. The ban highlighted the need for
stronger data protection laws in India and the importance of protecting personal data and
ensuring its secure storage and handling.
3. The establishment of the National Cyber Security Coordinator: In 2020, the Indian
government established the National Cyber Security Coordinator (NCSC) to oversee the
country's cybersecurity strategy and to coordinate efforts between various government
agencies. The NCSC is responsible for developing policies and guidelines for
cybersecurity, and for responding to cyber threats and incidents.
 CURRENT SCENARIO & CONCLUSION
In March 2018, a company called Cambridge Analytica took more than 50 million
Facebook profiles without permission for the Trump campaign. This raised worries about
how personal information is misused. Facebook was directly involved, making people even
more concerned about the safety of their data. Talking about this, there's a bigger debate
about watching what people do online without them agreeing to it. This goes against the idea
that privacy means being safe from unwanted snooping.

Michel Foucault criticized both powerful and regular people for allowing too much
watching. Countries, trying to control things happening on social media, now watch a lot of
people. China, for example, uses a 'Great Firewall' and special glasses that recognize
faces to watch its citizens. Even though people know more about this because of technology,
there are now more rules for tech companies to follow.

The big problem is that this watching culture affects countries, regular people, and big
companies. It makes dealing with digital rules and how things are controlled online really
tricky on a worldwide level.