The Supreme Court recognised the fundamental right to privacy in 2017, the same year the country witnessed some of the most large scale violations of privacy to have ever occurred.
As we go into 2018, there is little doubt that there is a lot at stake when it comes to issues of fundamental rights, the status of the individual, and the idea of democracy.
The petitioners argued that people were being denied access to basic needs such as food and adequate nutrition, midday meals in schools, rehabilitation benefits due to bonded labourers.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A. M. Khanwilkar and D. Y. Chandrachud, said the larger bench would commence hearing on these petitions in the last week of November this year.
The Supreme Court seems to have tread a course which marks a definitive, if not an entirely radical, departure from India’s original constitutional project of social transformation through state intervention.
Data privacy will benefit digital India, but if and when a new privacy and data protection law is enacted, the question is, how well it will be enforced.
Former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi talks about the recent right to privacy judgment, his objections to it, paranoia surrounding the Aadhaar and more.
“I did not mean that, that privacy is nothing. I only placed the position of the Supreme Court judgements.”
The constitution bench’s verdict in the Right to Privacy case encompasses many extraordinary achievements that show that our judiciary can and will correct errors of the past.
The right to privacy judgment not only learns from the past but also sets the wheel of liberty and freedom for the future.
The eight-judge bench has been overruled and the Aadhaar issue has been left unresolved. So where is the question of winning?’’, former Attorney General Rohatgi said.
The ruling will be important not just for the immediate Aadhaar case but also numerous other matters to do with state intrusions, decisional autonomy and informational privacy.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming verdict on the right to privacy could have a serious impact on society.
The Maharashtra government’s lawyer added that privacy wasn’t an exact concept, so couldn’t be treated as a fundamental right yet.
The court cannot simply declare privacy to be a fundamental right. It needs to explore its contours, including implications for the right to free speech.