We must move India past its existing consultative processes for rule-making, which often prompts stakeholders to take adversarial and extremely one-sided positions.
The T.K. Viswanathan committee’s recommendations could prove to be dangerous for free speech if acted upon without resolving its flaws.
While the judgement does not strictly defines the right to privacy or catalogues all of its parts, it has attempted to address the broad arguments that are used in justification of and in opposition to privacy.
The judges may still be able to articulate the manner in which limits for a right to privacy may be arrived at, without explicitly specifying them.
When ruling on the petition filed by Jairam Ramesh challenging passing the Aadhaar Act as a money Bill, the court has differing precedents to look at.
While the authority of the Lok Sabha Speaker is final and binding, Jairam Ramesh’s writ petition may allow the Supreme Court to question an incorrect application of substantive principles.
The new Aadhaar Bill does not address many issues raised by the standing committee that reviewed the original bill, including data-collection irregularities, and privacy and security issues.