Reliance Communication's affidavit in the Supreme Court contained the revelation that authorities had asked the company to tap more than 150,000 phones between 2006 and 2010. That a single service provider was ordered to tap an average of 550 phones a week is shocking. It raises serious questions about how pervasive the phenomenon of phone tapping is and whether it is conducted and monitored in accordance with the law. Phone tapping is legal under the Indian Telegraph Act 1885 and the Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008. But it is subject to a slew of procedures. Many of them are laid down in a 1997 Supreme Court order, which said that conversations may be intercepted only on certain grounds such as national sovereignty and public order. The court issued directions that tapping conducted on behalf of security agencies must be authorised by the Home Secretary of either the central or State government. It also said that all orders to intercept phones must be reviewed by an oversight committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary to examine if there is a contravention of the law.
Given the intermittent controversies over illegal phone taps, it is doubtful whether these judicial instructions are followed, in letter and spirit. By the Union Home Secretary G.K. Pillai's admission, at any given time, there are 6,000 to 8,000 phones that are legally tapped at the central level and an estimated 10,000 at the State level. This raises two questions. First, is it necessary to tap so many phones? Secondly, given the numbers, is it humanly possible for Home Secretaries or the oversight committee to examine each case with the attention it deserves? The Amar Singh case, in which the former Samajwadi Party leader's phone was tapped on the basis of a forged authorisation, is not a laughing matter. Today, private cellular service providers set up special cells with dedicated servers to intercept phones on behalf of the security agencies. Leaving tapping to private players has resulted in leaked transcripts of calls. The Cabinet Committee on Security has now proposed that the onus of monitoring conversations should be shifted from service providers to the government and that a centralised hub be set up for phone taps. But the problem goes well beyond unauthorised taps by service providers. The government must restore public trust by ensuring that phones are not tapped unless it is absolutely necessary. As the Supreme Court observed, the security of one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion is basic to a free society.
