In a Supreme Court hearing, a senior advocate, CA Sundaram asserted that basic needs should take precedence over the right to privacy. The Judges ruled that economic rights should not curtail fundamental rights. The emphasis on economic rights is an argument for Communist authoritarianism. Amartya Sen has contended that famines are less widespread in democratic countries as freedom of expression ensures that famine reports cannot be suppressed. It is true that projects like Jan Dhan, Aadhar and Mobile Governance require collection of citizens’ data for facilitating welfare measures. But the authorities doing it should avoid misuse. Digital India calls for firm data protection by the Government. That means the apex court should always defend the right to privacy. At the same time, legislation is necessary to protect data privacy.
The law should make it necessary that an individual’s consent is obtained before collecting and processing personal data. But there should be exceptions. There should be strict accountability in case of data breaches. Procedures and punishments should be laid down in detail. India is a signatory to international treaties guaranteeing the right to privacy. A BJP MP has tabled a Data (Privacy and Protection) bill, 2017 in Parliament to protect citizens’ data. In such cases, private legislation may be called for. In the final analysis, however, the choice between food and privacy seems unreal. What is food security worth with a sizeable BPL population in the country? And the right to privacy can mean refusal to disclose real income and salting away of black money. The opposite may mean disinformation and harassment.
