Before the commencement of the Winter Session of the Indian Parliament, we have prepared our second Legislative Brief on Digital Rights. In our brief, we highlight some of the focus areas within the larger issues of data protection and digital rights that call for the extensive deliberation in the houses of the Parliament.
Hi everyone,
This is our second legislative brief, and we have worked very hard on this. However, we know we can always improve, and so we want you to let us know how we can improve this - please do provide us with your feedback!
Thank you for an informative and exhaustive brief.
Regarding the Personal Data Protection Bill:
Granted that JPC member Jairam Ramesh, RS MP, has said that he will move a dissent note against Clause 35 (see below), that by itself may not mean much. Is IFF planning to reach out to MPs to get this appalling clause removed or at least moderated with some qualifiers, before it becomes law?
A PDP law that leaves a citizen’s data completely exposed to the state, is not compatible with the fact that privacy is a fundamental right.
Thanks!
CC: @aparatbar
Thank you sir, @Rohin_Garg has been following these development closely. The objective of this brief to deepen our existing engagement with parliamentarians and lawmakers. Here over the years we have been able to assist and provide inputs to several members of parliament cutting across party lines on a wide variety of digital rights issues.
We will as we have done in the past reach out to MPs individually and seek their time for meetings and analyse the Data Bill when it is tabled by the Joint Parlimentary Committee to seek improvements. At the same time let me indicate that many MPS by their own initiative such as Mr. Jairam Ramesh are well aware of the need for a strong data protection statute in India. We will do our best to support them.
As an aside, I would also like to pragmatically pose on what may be possible in the short term may not be substantive changes to the draft that is tabled by the Government in Parliament. This is due to the numerical breakup of the existing assembly. However, we are more optimistic in the long term that a more rights focussed law will evolve through a process of public advocacy, legal changes through amendments and court rulings.
IFF will work with other groups, organisations and individuals and do our very best!
Thank you @aparatbar for your detailed response. I understand that at the moment it is unlikely that we will get a PDP law that would give even a modicum of protection against state surveillance, so I really appreciate the fact that IFF is determined to stay the course for the long haul!
@Rohin_Garg : Thanks again for an excellent brief. I do have one suggestion for future Parliament sessions:
As a companion document to the brief (and for the benefit of IFF members), could you publish your strategy on which items you are prioritizing to influence during that session? Given the plethora of critical items, it is not possible to positively influence all of them before they become law. So, it would help to know which ones IFF is focussed on influencing and how.
All the best!
Thank you for this excellent suggestion sir! In my opinion, I think the legislative brief itself may not be the best place to express this, given that the brief is meant to be a a more ‘dispassionate’ issue-based document of what MPs should focus on, and so it does not talk about IFF directly. However, I certainly think that the accompanying blogpost can have a section dedicated to this, and we will strive to include this in the future.
Sounds good! Thanks.
CONSIDERING THE PRESENT POLITICAL TURMOILS,VIEWS OF EXPERTS WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THOSE PASSING THE BILL.THE PROVISIONS SHOULD BE VIEWED STRICTLY ON MERIT,WHICH ULTIMATELY WILL PREVAIL AND WILL BE EASIER TO IMPLEMENT.EX-JUDGES SHOULD BE INVOLVED FOR FINALISING THE LAW SO THAT THE LAW WILL PASS THE TEST BEFORE IT IS CHALLENGED IN A COURT OF LAW.strong text