Though the main thrust of the discussions on the Right to Privacy is directed to AADHAR and maybe rightly so, let us not overlook the fact that AADHAR is just a part of the whole Privacy conundrum . Any person with common sense will understand that with the hyper connectivity and smart technology today , there is no way to evade surveillance unless you take counter measures. Now normal people do not bother so much about privacy other than very personal experiences.
Yesterday, we celebrated the birthday of my son at home very privately - just three of us - and as usual had a few photos and selfies. Now, my son is less of a show-off and narcissist than me . He knew I would post this pics on facebook . Being shy or maybe some private reasons of his, he forbade me to tag him on my post. I agreed.
Imagine my surprise when on posting the photographs ,facebook automatically tagged my son to the post. I tried to un-tag him myself but not allowed . Then I experimented with other pics and found that any pic having his face is getting tagged to him. Finally , keeping his sentiments in mind , I desisted from posting any pic of his and just posted the photos of the greeting card and the cake.
Why I narrate this is to make my point about the difficulty in evading surveillance . Privacy now is just a personal sentiment . If someone respects it , it is OK but if they don't then you are just like an open book.
Saying this, let me add that the doubts and controversies related to privacy are being raised, expressed and echoed across the spectrum ( of thinking people) is not so much because of the inevitability of attention but more about how this surveillance affects us. In Indian context , this also assumes another dimension with the present government and its penchant to use, rather misuse data and facts for coercion and blackmail to browbeat opposition and even mislead the supporters .
A razor is useful to shave and enhance your personality for a human being. But in the hands of a monkey it will create a terrible mess. With the regularity of monkey business going in the name of politics and governance, it is good that there is at least an opportunity for legal recourse and accountability, however remote or long winding it may be. this itself will serve as a deterrent.
Further the overwhelming 9-0 verdict by the Supreme Court bench who passed the judgement yesterday (24th August 2017) emphasises the unanimity on the doubts in their minds . The judgement will not stop prying and unauthorised surveillance but at least it can't be treated as a matter of routine. I may be suffering from piles but my boss will not be able to cite it as a reason for my non -performance during the P review meeting and then brag about it with his peers - how he screwed me - and derive pleasure. There is a thing called dignity after all .
The importance of this judgement will sink gradually as lawyers analyse it threadbare . Even many developed countries do not have such clearcut directions on privacy as a fundamental right. Nobody should be under the impression that it is absolute. The right to life, livelihood and national interest will always be above it . If a fully clothed woman gets injured and to save her someone has to remove her clothes, it is neither an assault to her modesty nor against her privacy. Informing the police about a hidden terrorist does not mean infringement of his privacy . A playboy on a private yacht can not claim that the fishermen are destroying his privacy. There can be many such examples . That is beyond the point. What matters is that the relevance of this judgement on the issues of intolerance that we face today. Eating , dressing , marrying out of personal choice without inconveniencing the society at large falls under this purview. This judgement will bolster liberal and secular values.
But on the flipside , it will also inhibit information sharing to some extent . But for that , we have the RTI and considering the positives , the overall impact should be of relief.
No comments:
Post a Comment