Congress hails Supreme Court’s privacy judgment

Mumbai: The unanimous judgment by the nine judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court confirming that right to privacy is a fundamental right has been hailed as a historical judgment by persons from different walks of lives including lawyers, activists and politicians who feel that this will put an end to the government’s effort to infringe on the personal space of individuals.

MP and Congress state president Ashok Chavan said, “The Congress party welcomes the SC judgment wholeheartedly. Right to privacy is an integral part of personal liberty and right to life. However, the apex court has held that the central government does not hold right to privacy is not a fundamental right and stated the same in the court. But the nine-judge bench quashed their claims and cited right to privacy as a fundamental right, a demand that the Congress had made during the case.

Advocate Sujay Kantawala senior advocate, Bombay high court said that the fact that right to privacy has been deemed to be a fundamental right is a historical moment. “The 547 page judgment is a landmark judgment as it has clarified that personal liberty cannot be compromised and infringed upon by the government. In the event of the government wanting to access information of an individual it has to follow proper guidelines to get it. The judgement also requires the state to define what information an individual needs to share and will put an end to the illegal ways in which individual information is being gathered,” said Kanatawala.

Activist Kamayani Mahabal who has filed a petition challenging the government’s insistence on linking all aspects of an individual’s activities to Aadhar card said that the fact that there was a unanimous decision by the nine judges goes to show that right to privacy is of utmost importance and the government cannot coerce people to share their information forcefully, “The repercussions of the judgment will be reflected on all other issues that deal with personal liberty and choice like section 377 that deals with homosexuality and Information technology act which deals with data protection but not privacy protection. Henceforth if the government wants an individual to share information, it will have to prove to the court and the individual that their privacy is well-protected by a robust privacy protection system,” said Mahabal.