Privacy A Vague Concept; Cannot Be Fundamental Right, UIDAI Argues
Privacy is subjective and therefore cannot be defined, UIDAI argues in Supreme Court.
The Centre has appointed a committee headed by former Supreme Court Judge Justice BN Srikrishna to deliberate on a data protection framework for India, the court was informed on Tuesday.
This committee will make suggestions for a draft data protection Bill, Additional Solicitor General of India and Senior Advocate Tushar Mehta said before the nine-judge bench of the apex court that is currently hearing arguments on whether privacy is a fundamental right. Mehta is arguing on behalf of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in the matter, which is the nodal body responsible for rolling out Aadhaar.
Privacy is subjective and therefore cannot be defined, UIDAI argued during the course of the hearing on Tuesday. Besides, it is already covered under statutory laws, Mehta said.
Privacy is inherently a vague and subjective concept...which is incapable of any precise definition/contours cannot be conferred with a status of Constitutional Fundamental RightTushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General
Continuing its arguments from the last hearing on July 27, the Maharashtra government said privacy can be introduced as a fundamental right only by the Parliament through a Constitutional amendment. The intention is clear when the framers of the Constitution rejected privacy as a fundamental right, Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram argued on behalf of the state.
Data protection can be covered under Article 300(A) which is the right to property, he added.
The hearing is likely to conclude on Wednesday after the government and petitioners present their remaining arguments.
In the previous hearing, Sundaram had argued that it was a deliberate decision by the founding fathers to keep privacy out of the ambit of fundamental rights and therefore it should not be accorded that status now.
A five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court that was hearing the validity of Aadhaar and certain aspects of privacy had referred the limited matter of whether privacy is a fundamental right to this nine-judge bench. The bench is re-examining whether the two earlier rulings – 1954 judgment in MP Sharma’s case and 1962 verdict in Kharak Singh’s case – are the correct expressions of the Constitution. An eight-judge and a six-judge bench, in the two cases, respectively, had held that there’s no fundamental right to privacy.
The nine-judge bench is being led by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar and includes Justices J Chelameswar, SA Bobde, RK Agrawal, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Abhay Manohar Sapre, DY Chandrachud, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abdul Nazeer.
