Note the key terms for prelims like DNA profiling etc. The privacy issue involved and the safeguards needed is the issue for mains here.
First time, UIDAI has disclosed that a mechanism exists under which a card holder can choose to block the biometric information linked to his Aadhaar card.
The A-G argued that right to privacy of an Indian citizen has become a futile notion in an era when Facebook can track every detail, thought and movement through its WhatsApp software application.
New bench will hear the fundamental issue whether the state is in the right by creating a situation by which a citizen is enticed to voluntarily part with his privacy rights, for social benefit schemes
Among all the forensic tools available to criminal investigators, DNA analysis is the only one that has consistently produced reliable results.
The bill proposes creation of a national DNA data bank, without requisite safeguards for privacy, and opens the information to everything from civic disputes to compilation of statistics.
Some pertinent questions –
DNA Bill could result in large scale violation of human rights.
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi asked the court to constitute a nine-judge bench to decide what he said is a disputed question of law and constitutional provisions.
Quoting a SC judgement of 1962 in Kharak Singh case, Centre replied that the right to privacy was a ‘vague concept’ and not a ‘guaranteed right’ under the Constitution.
However, the petitioner pointed to several decisions of the SC subsequent to the Kharak Singh case, including the Maneka Gandhi case, in which the court gave a very wide ambit to the right of personal liberty.
“Privacy is at the core of our vital needs. Privacy leads to fulfilment of our goals, enrichment of ourselves and our growth. The need for privacy distinguishes humans from other animals. It is a fundamental right,” Mr. Divan said even as Justice Chelameswar suggested that since there was a “divergence of opinion” the matter may be referred to a larger bench.