MUMBAI
(Reuters) - India's Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday to determine
whether individual privacy is a fundamental right protected by the
constitution, in a ruling legal scholars say will have far-reaching
consequences.
The court
has set up a rare nine-member bench to rule on the matter triggered by a
petition challenging the mandatory use of national identity cards, which are
known as Aadhaar, as an infringement of privacy.
Constitutional
experts say if the court decides privacy is a fundamental right, it could open
up to review a law criminalizing homosexuality, a ban on the consumption of
beef in many states and an alcohol ban in some.
"The
consequences are huge," said constitutional scholar Menaka Guruswamy.
"This
goes far beyond Aadhaar. The ruling will decide the manner in which
constitutional democracy will endure."
India's
government has argued in the past that the constitution, which came into effect
in 1950, does not guarantee individual privacy as an inalienable fundamental
right.
Critics say
the Aadhaar identity card links enough data to create a comprehensive profile
of a person’s spending habits, their friends and acquaintances, the property
they own, and a trove of other information.
There are
fears the data could be misused by a government that argues Indians have no
right to privacy.
In May,
security researchers discovered that the Aadhaar information of as many as 135
million people had leaked online. UIDAI, the agency that governs Aadhaar, has
repeatedly said that its data is secure.
Guruswamy
said the concern was that if the court were to throw out privacy as a basic
right, it would give the state much greater powers to monitor people and to
enact laws with an impact on personal freedoms.
"If the
court rules for the government, then it's going to impact all kinds of
footprints of citizens, both professionally, and in their private lives,"
Guruswamy said.
"It
will impact my right to my body, to what I do at home, my communications, and
everything else."
Critics say
personal rights have come into sharper focus since Prime Minister Narendra
Modi's ruling alliance took office in 2014 as it pushes a nationalist agenda at
the cost of individual freedoms.
Alok Kumar
Prasanna, a lawyer based in Bengaluru, said a court decision upholding privacy
would come in conflict with the conservative leanings of the ruling coalition
whose "basic cultural agenda is that the majority can impose its choices
on the minority, or restrict their choices on anything, from food to sexual
orientation".
Reuters
0 Comments