Human Rights In Indian Cyberspace

Civil liberties in India and technological revolution are sharing an adverse relationship in India. The more technology India is using the greater are civil liberties violations in India. For instance, e-surveillance in India is openly done without any constitutionally sound legal framework.

The civil liberties protection in cyberspace in India are totally absent and  Indian government is introducing laws, regulations and rules that clearly violate the freedoms guaranteed by Indian constitution. Now Indian government has extended its e-surveillance activities to Internet and mobile infrastructure as well.

According to Praveen Dalal, leading techno legal expert of Asia and managing partner of Perry4Law and CEO of PTLB, Surveillance of Internet Traffic in India is one of the top priorities of Indian Government. Now E-Surveillance is proposed to be expanded to even mobile infrastructure. The cell site location based e-surveillance in India is also in contemplation. Cell site data location laws in India and privacy issues are once again bypassed for this proposal. Even the E-Surveillance Policy of India is missing that can provide some safeguards against Illegal and Unconstitutional E-Surveillance in India, informs Praveen Dalal.

Similarly projects like Aadhar project of India, central monitoring system project of India, etc are also intended to strengthen the e-surveillance capabilities of India without and constitutional safeguards.

ICT policies and strategies of India are grossly defective and clearly violating human rights in cyberspace. In fact, there is a dedicated resource titled websites, blogs and news censorship by Google and Indian government that is making a database of various censorship and results manipulation activities in India.

Indian government must ensure civil liberties protection in Indian cyberspace as that is its constitutional as well as human right objective.

Google Outcry Lack of Proper Internet Intermediary Law In India

Internet intermediaries in India have started showing their dissatisfaction towards the draconian policies and rules of Indian government pertaining to Internet and its use. E-surveillance in India and surveillance of Internet traffic in India have increased to a considerable limit that now requires judicial scrutiny. Censorship of Internet in India should be challenged as soon as possible in the larger interests of Indian Internet users.

Intermediaries liability for cyber law due diligence in India has been extended to such levels that Internet intermediaries are now finding it difficult to comply. Internet censorship in India has become a big nuisance for these Internet intermediaries. Naturally these Internet intermediaries cannot remain silent anymore.

In fact, Yahoo has filed a petition raising the questions regarding the right to privacy of a company that stores sensitive data of its customers and users and to what extent authorities can coerce it to part with the information considered necessary to either track terror perpetrators or thwart future attacks.

Now Internet intermediaries in India have been asked to pre screen contents before they are posted on their websites. India wants companies like Google and Facebook to censor users’ contents before they are posted. Naturally this is an unreasonable and impractical demand that Internet intermediaries cannot fulfill.

Google has reacted to this dictate by responding that they follow the law regarding removal of illegal contents. It has also clarified it stand that when content is legal but controversial it do not remove it because people's differing views should be respected, so long as they are legal. Further, even where content is legal but breaks Google’s own terms and conditions, it is removed once Google is notified about the same.

Internet intermediaries are now complaining that India has no clear guidelines about what constitutes offensive and hateful contents. Sources from Indian government claims that the officials had got instructions to draw up the guidelines in this regard soon. Indian government is working upon the guidelines that may take three/four months to formulate. Let us hope that Indian government would formulate suitable and sensible guidelines in this regard.

Natgrid Is Still A Nebulous And Unconstitutional Project

A friend of mine has written a very apt article titled Natgrid and NIA became more Obscure and unconstitutional. This piece has been widely appreciated and generously quoted. However, surprisingly, the original source of this article has disappeared from Google’s search results.

However, keeping in mind the fact that Wordpress has censored and deleted our Blogs and Google is censoring the search and news results, this is no big surprise. Wordpress has crossed all the limits by even disabling the accounts of all our contributors at the Techno Legal News and Views platform as well. If you have observed, you must also be aware of the strange behaviour of Blogspot during the last few months.

However, despite the Internet censorship, website blocking and e-surveillance exercises of Wordpress, Blogspot and Indian government, the constitution of India empowers me to freely express my views in India. Now even the United Nations has declared that access to internet is a human right.

So what is this national intelligence grid (Natgrid) project of India? Natgrid is a project pertaining to intelligence gathering and its analysis. While there is nothing wrong with having a project like Natgrid but the way it has been implemented makes it illegal and unconstitutional.

Firstly, Natgrid is not at all trying to reconcile the conflicting interests of civil liberties and national security. On the contrary it is expressly violating the civil liberties of Indians in cyberspace. Till now Indian government has not specified the procedural safeguards that can prevent the misuse of Natgrid.

Secondly, there is no official website of Natgrid where the objects, purpose, scope, limitations, etc of Natgrid have been mentioned. In the absence of adequate information about Natgrid, its veracity and genuineness is in great doubts.

Thirdly, neither the Natgrid project nor the intelligence agencies and other agencies who are going to use it are subject to any “parliamentary oversight”. When the Natgrid project and agencies are themselves governed by no legal framework and they are not accountable to the parliament and judiciary, this make the very project unconstitutional and unwarrantable.

Fourthly, even the cabinet committee on security (CCS) is aware of the “constitutional limitations” and that is the reason why it gave Natgrid a “conditional approval”. Statutory enactments have to be enacted before Natgrid can proceed with the crucial stages of its implementation.

Despite the media campaign to give a positive image to Natgrid project, it is and would always remain an e-surveillance project that has no constitutional sanction and is unconstitutional in nature.

Was Pranab Mukherjee's Office Bugged For E-Surveillance?

Last September, finance minister Pranab Mukherjee complained that his office was bugged. Mukherjee requested the PM to order a secret inquiry into the "serious breach of security in his office" in the form of "planted adhesives" in 16 locations in a possible surveillance attempt. Though no live microphone devices were found, he had reported it to the PM. Realising the seriousness of the issue, Intelligence Bureau (IB) immediately swept into action.

However, IB found nothing wrong at Mukherjee’s office and no surveillance equipment was found. To be on the safer side, IB increased the frequency of its “technical sweeping” in high offices.

Technical sweeping is a more advanced form of surveillance detection than the ordinary surveillance detection technique. Now instead of occasional anti-bugging exercise inside finance ministry, the IB has now included this ministry in North Block as part of its regular “technical sweeping” work like what it does for its own premises and offices of the PM in South Block and home minister in North Block.

E-surveillance has become a nuisance for not only Indian citizens but also for the government itself. Private individuals have been doing e-surveillance and phone tapping in India with or without governmental orders. We have no constitutionally sound e-surveillance and phone tapping law in India. Further, even the e-surveillance policy of India is missing. We urgently need a lawful interception law in India.

There is no provision for “judicial scrutiny” of e-surveillance and “phone tapping orders in India and this is giving lots of room for private individuals and those who have no authority of law to indulge in illegal e-surveillance and phone tapping.

Indian government must urgently do something about this serious problem that has already taken a gigantic shape. A system devised by Indian government is itself proving a nuisance for it. Time has come for the Indian government to clean the mess created by itself.

Can Raghu Raman Deliver Natgrid Project On Time?

Intelligence infrastructure of India is in big mess. Whether it is legal framework or technological infrastructure, Indian intelligence agencies have none. However, even if there are no laws to justify the working of intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies in India yet their works and projects are well beyond the justifications provided under the constitution of India.

In short, intelligence agencies of India and projects related to them are working without constitutional sanction and parliamentary oversight. Even worst is the fact that they are openly violating privacy rights and civil liberties of Indians.

Take the example of Aadhar project of India or UID project of India. It is managed by Nandan Nilekani as the chairman of unique identification authority of India (UIDAI). Aadhar project is hiding truth from Indians and is a very dangerous and e-surveillances oriented project.

Another project is national intelligence grid (Natgrid) that is also not supported by any legal framework and is well beyond parliamentary scrutiny. Projects like Aadhar, NATGRID, Central Monitoring System (CMS), etc are not desirable without “Constitutionally Sounds Laws” supporting them, opines Praveen Dalal, managing partner of Perry4Law and leading techno legal expert of India. Till now none of these projects are governed by any Legal Framework and Parliamentary Scrutiny informs Dalal.

Now Raghu Raman, project coordinator of Natgrid, has barely got an extension of six months. However, it is doubtful that he can deliver results in such a short period of time. Further, there is an urgent need to establish e-surveillance policy of India as soon as possible.

Lacks of Privacy Safeguards have already stalled Natgrid Project. Irrespective what Indian Government claims, Natgrid Project of India is in troubled waters. Natgrid would remain in doldrums till it is properly planned and legally implemented, opines Dalal.

India Has Become An E-Police State

This is the updated version of my previous article on similar topic. Cyber law of India is incorporated in the information technology act, 2000 (IT Act 2000) that was drastically amended through the information technology amendment act 2008 (IT Act 2008). The cyber law of India has become so offensive and useless that it requires an urgent repeal. Instead of following the right path, India has chosen to become an e-police state.

Suggestions have been given in the past that United Nations (UN) must protect human rights in cyberspace as well. However, UN is not serious about protecting human rights in cyberspace. Countries like India are taking advantage of this void created by inaction on the part of UN.

Human Rights in Cyberspace are outlawed in India, says Praveen Dalal, managing partner of New Delhi based ICT law firm Perry4Law and leading techno legal expert of India. In fact, the IT Act, 2008 has made the sole Cyber Law of India susceptible to the attacks of “Unconstitutionality” as it is now openly and blatantly violating various Fundamental Rights as incorporated in the Constitution of India, informs Dalal.

Cyber law of India has been doomed to its detriment and civil liberties of Indian citizens have been at their nadir. All this has happened due to lack of insight and capabilities of Indian legislation makers. The vested interests have overshadowed public interest and the sole cyber law of India has become an instrumentality for mass deprivation and grave suppression of cyber rights of Indians. E-surveillance in India has come as a death knell for privacy rights in India.

Despite the assurances of the law minister Mr. Veerappa Molly regarding further amendments in the IT Act 2008, the same has been notified. This has officially given India the status of a chronic e-surveillance State. The unreasonable and unconstitutional e-surveillance and draconic police state powers conferred by the IT Act 2008 have become the law of the land.

Indians have ceased to hold some of the basic human rights in cyberspace and the omnipresent state powers have doomed the Indian cyber sphere. The accountability is missing and the reasonableness deliberately scrapped off from the provisions contained in the IT Act 2008. Even basic level encryption that is absolutely essential for safe and secure cyber space transactions has been under scrutiny. We have neither encryption standards in India nor encryption laws and regulations in India.

It is ironic that the Ministry of Law, Government of India and Mr. Molly finally gave away the freedom and security of India netizens in the hands of otherwise incompetent and inexperienced officials. How the Law Ministry allowed these unconstitutional provisions to be passed is still a bigger mystery?

The IT Act 2008 is a dark moment for the Indians wherein their rights have been curtailed on the one hand and the law has been made impotent on the other. Most of the offences have been made bailable and the deterrent has been lost forever. The misuse of the unbridled powers is very likely to happen as there are no safeguards and reasonable procedures that can prevent the same.

What would be the next step? Perhaps we would not be allowed to write articles like these in future as well if we keep on sleeping like we have been doing in the past. Alternatively, we must use self defence in cyberspace to defeat unconstitutional and illegal e-surveillance and Internet censorship exercises of Indian government and its agencies.

Internet Kill Switch In India

Indian government in general and intelligence and security agencies of India in particular are not at all comfortable with the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in India. For instance, use of encryption technology in India is feared like a plague by Indian government. That is why there are practically no encryption laws and regulations in India.

Similarly, Internet in India is under potential threats of e-surveillance and civil liberties violations. We have no lawful interception law in India and phone tapping and e-surveillance in India is done in an illegal and unconstitutional manner. As a result, Internet censorship in India, phone tapping and e-surveillance in India have increased a lot.

India has poor cyber law and inadequate cyber security. We have no cyber security policy as well as a national security policy in India. Critical infrastructure protection in India has not yet received the attention of Indian government.

No doubt critical infrastructure protection in India is absolutely required but Internet kill switch is no a solution to cyber security problems of India. Further, Internet kill switch should not be used as a tool of e-surveillance and Internet control in India. On the contrary, we need active steps to formulate anti Internet kill switch measures in India.

We originally raised these concerns in India for the first time and it seems now the media has also taken note of this issue. We once again reiterate the need of anti Internet kill switch laws in India before it is too late.

Internet Censorship In India Has Increased

Internet has been under constant and furious attacks all over the world. The fact is that Internet is under potential threat these days. The threat is not only from malicious users, rouge nations and automated viruses and worms but also from our own governments.

Take the example of Internet kill switch (IKS) that has been increasingly seen as a solution to cyber threats. But IKS is no solution to cyber security threats. Rather it is a remedy worst than the malady and would prove dangerous in the long term.

The only purpose of IKS is to strengthen the e-surveillance powers of governments and its agencies. This is the reason why we must have anti Internet kill switch measures at hand.

Internet censorship is a result of this desire to control the Internet and online activities of netizens. Internet censorship has drastically increased in India in recent times. With adoption of projects like central monitoring system (CMS) by Indian government, this is quiet clear. Like other projects, CMS also is not under parliamentary scrutiny and this raises serious civil liberties violations issues in India.

Recently Blogspot was blocked in India once again under an “experimental blocking” exercise. It is believed that the same has been done using the CMS of India. This exercise was undertaken to analyse the websites blocking capabilities of Indian government and its agencies.

India has a draconian but cyber criminals’ friendly cyber law in the form of information technology act, 2000 (IT Act 2000). It was amended in 2008 to confer unregulated e-surveillance, Internet censorship and website blocking powers to Indian government and its agencies. The present cyber law of India is an unconstitutional one in the absence of procedural safeguards that can prevent these abusive draconian powers under the IT Act 2000. It requires an urgent repeal.

If at all India is serious about national security and cyber security, it must formulate a national security policy of India. This policy must cover issues like national security, cyber security, internal security, external security, etc. It must also provide constitutionally sound guidelines regarding cyber security and national security.

Presently, e-surveillance, phone tapping, interceptions, etc are not done under a constitutionally sound law. In fact, India has no constitutionally valid phone tapping and lawful interception law so far.

If India wishes to safeguard its cyberspace, Internet censorship is no solution. Rather, Internet censorship does not give positive results and always gives a bad taste afterwards. India must seriously consider this aspect and come up with effective laws and policies regarding lawful and constitutional regulation of Internet in India.