Right To Privacy Debate: Who Said What In Supreme Court

The nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court will pronounce its judgement in the right to privacy matter on Thursday, August 24. This is a re-post of the article published earlier after the Supreme Court reserved its judgement in the matter on August 2.

The Supreme Court on August 2 reserved its judgement on whether there is a fundamental right to privacy after hearing concluded in the matter.

The nine-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, heard arguments from all stakeholders for seven days. The judgement will be announced by the end of this month as Justice Khehar is set to retire by then.

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.

Here are the key arguments made by petitioners, the Centre and certain state governments on the matter.

Petitioners

• Right to privacy is an inalienable, natural right
• Privacy is not about secrecy but about dignity
• Limitations on privacy must be in consonance with the law
• Digital property as important as physical property
• Right of privacy enables us to exercise our other other fundamental rights
• Just because right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution does not mean it does not exist
• Freedom of press is not mentioned in fundamental rights but it is accepted as a right

Laws across the world recognise the right to liberty and privacy, said Senior Counsel Gopal Subramanium representing one of the petitioners, adding that both are essential conditions to exercise any fundamental right. The minority view in the 1962 Kharak Singh case is the correct view, Subramanium added.

Also Read: No Liberty Without Right To Privacy, Petitioners Argue Before Supreme Court

Government

• There is a fundamental right to privacy but it is wholly qualified
• The right to life will still hold primacy over right to privacy
• Constitution makers deliberately omitted making privacy a fundamental right
• Right to privacy as a fundamental right is nowhere specifically mentioned in the Constitution

Also Read: Fundamental Right To Privacy On Case-To-Case Basis, Centre Argues

State of Maharashtra

• There is no fundamental right to privacy
• Privacy must not be elevated to the status of fundamental right
• If it has to be elevated as a fundamental right, Parliament can do it via Constitutional amendment
• Privacy was debated when Constitution was drafted; it was not included at that time
• Privacy is a word without exactitude. The aim of the Constituent Assembly was to make fundamental rights as definite as possible

Also Read: No Fundamental Right To Privacy, Maharashtra Argues Before Supreme Court

Unique Identification Authority Of India

• Privacy cannot be conferred with a status of Constitutional fundamental right
• Privacy is subjective, and therefore, cannot be defined
• Central government has formed a committee to deliberate on data protection framework

Also Read: Privacy A Vague Concept; Cannot Be Fundamental Right, UIDAI Argues