Thursday witnessed the Supreme Court delivering a historic verdict on the right to privacy. The court rules that right to privacy is “intrinsic to life and liberty” and is inherently protected under the various fundamental freedoms enshrined under Part III of the Constitution. Read more.
Here are the updates after the court ruling:
6.45 pm: “Privacy issue went to Supreme Court because previous UPA government brought Aadhaar without legal framework,” says Finance Minister Arun Jaitley.
“We framed Aadhaar law ensuring privacy, as fundamental right, will be protected.
“SC accepted privacy is a fundamental right but not an absolute right. The judgment is a positive development,” he adds.
"The right to privacy comes with reasonable restrictions," he says adding "in Aadhaar legislation restrictions are fair, just and reasonable."
3.45 pm: Aadhaar is a technological marvel praised by many countries, says Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar.
3.30 pm: At a press conference, flashing his UIDAI card, the Minister says, “The government welcomes this judgment. It had been consistent of the view, particularly with Aadhaar, that privacy should be a fundamental right and should be implemented with restrictions. The UPA [United Progressive Alliance] brought Aadhaar without any law. We then asked how a government could collect biometric data without any constitutional backing. We brought in the Aadhaar Bill.”
Mr. Prasad reads out from Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s speech while introducing the Aadhaar Bill in Parliament: “Privacy is part of individual liberty. The right is not absolute and subject to restriction”.
He then turns against the Congress and the Left. “The Congress and the Left are attacking us since the verdict. What has been the Congress record in protection of individual’s liberty,” he asks in a reference to Emergency.
“We have constituted a high-level committee on data protection headed by retired Judge Srikrishna. The court has acknowledged a robust data regime is needed to balance the inequities at individual and national levels and above all in delivering social welfare schemes,” he observes.
“The essence of the judgment is that the right to privacy is a fundamental right. But it is not absolute. It is subject to reasonable restrictions... subject to just and fair practices. The essence of the judgment is the crux of the Finance Minister's statement made in Parliament on behalf of the government while moving the Aadhaar Bill,” he says.
3:10 pm: Congress president Sonia Gandhi says the verdict on right to privacy strikes at “unbridled encroachment and surveillance” by the State and its agencies on the life of the common man. The Congress and other Opposition parties together spoke for right to privacy against the “arrogant” attempts of the BJP govt to curtail them.
2:50 pm: Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi says it is a major blow to “fascist forces” and a rejection of the BJP’s ideology of “suppression through surveillance”. The judgment is a “victory for every Indian”, he says on Twitter.
2.10 pm: Lauding the unanimous verdict, senior advocate Soli Sorabjee says, “You cannot make a blanket and categorical statement that Aaadhaar will be banned or is unconstitutional. No fundamental right is absolute. It is always subject to reasonable restrictions.” Read more.
11:55 am: R. Chandrasekhar, a petitioner in the case, welcomes the verdict. As the world moves towards digitisation, citizens must have rights against misuse of information, he says.
10: 50 am: Supreme Court overrules its 1954 M.P. Sharma case and 1961 Kharak Singh case judgments that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.
10: 45 am: Supreme Court rules that right to privacy is intrinsic to life and liberty, thus coming under Article 21, and comes under the various fundamental freedoms in PART III of the Indian Constitution.
What is the lowdown on Right to Privacy?
10: 30 am: Here is a timeline of the roller-coaster ride the issue has had in the Supreme Court in the past years. Read more.
10: 25 am: Opinion| Is right to privacy a positive right?
"Some arguments advanced by those seeking the right to privacy, however, are troubling. It seems that for many, the right is basically against the state, and not so much the digital corporations."
10.20 am: The marathon Supreme Court hearings on the right to privacy saw debates and discussions on the "amorphous" right to privacy and whether it deserved the status of a fundamental right. The judges, lawyers and legal experts attempted to crystallise the right in a technological era where the citizens themselves voluntarily part with personal data.
