Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

GS Paper: GS2-01.Indian Constitution-Historical underpinnings & evolution; Features, amendments, significant provisions, basic structure of Constitution

  • President’s address in Parliament

    Many Opposition parties announced their decision to boycott the President’s address to the joint sitting of Parliament at the start of the Budget session in solidarity with the farmers protesting against the three farm laws.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q. The President’s address is one of the most solemn occasions in the Parliamentary calendar. Discuss. Highlight its importance in Parliamentary Democracy.

    President’s address

    • The Constitution gives the President the power to address either House or a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament.
    • Article 87 provides two special occasions on which the President addresses a joint sitting. The first is to address the opening session of a new legislature after a general election.
    • The second is to address the first sitting of Parliament each year. A session of a new or continuing legislature cannot begin without fulfilling this requirement.
    • When the Constitution came into force, the President was required to address each session of Parliament.

    In the UK, the history of the monarch addressing the Parliament goes back to the 16th century.  In the US, President Gorge Washington addressed Congress for the first time in 1790.

    History & precedent

    • In India, the practice of the President addressing Parliament can be traced back to the Government of India Act of 1919.
    • This law gave the Governor-General the right of addressing the Legislative Assembly and the Council of State.
    • The law did not have a provision for a joint address but the Governor-General did address the Assembly and the Council together on multiple occasions.
    • There was no address by him to the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) from 1947 to 1950.
    • And after the Constitution came into force, President Rajendra Prasad addressed members of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha for the first time on January 31, 1950.

    By the govt, about the govt

    • The President’s speech essentially highlights the government’s policy priorities and plans for the upcoming year. The address provides a broad framework of the government’s agenda and direction.
    • There is no set format for the President’s speech. The Constitution states that the President shall “inform Parliament of the cause of the summons”.

    How it is done in India?

    • The speech that the President reads is the viewpoint of the government and is written by it.
    • Usually, in December, the PM’s Office asks the various ministries to start sending in their inputs for the speech.
    • A message also goes out from the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs asking ministries to send information about any legislative proposals that need to be included in the President’s address.
    • All this information is aggregated and shaped into a speech, which is then sent to the President. The government uses the President’s address to make policy and legislative announcements.

    Assembly debates on the matter

    • During the making of the Constitution, Prof K T Shah wanted the President’s address to be more specific.
    • He suggested that the language be changed to specify that the President shall inform Parliament “on the general state of the Union including financial proposals, and other particular issues of policy he deems suitable for such address”.
    • His amendment was inspired by the US Constitution, according to which the President gives to Congress information on the State of the Union, and recommend measures as he shall judge necessary.
    • But Shah’s amendment was rejected by the Constituent Assembly.
    • The address of the President follows a general structure in which it highlights the government’s accomplishments from the previous year and sets the broad governance agenda for the coming year.

    Notable addresses till date

    • In 1985 President Giani Zail Singh announced that PM Rajiv Gandhi’s government intended to introduce a new national education policy and the anti-defection law.
    • In 1996, PM Vajpayee’s 13-day government announced its intention of giving statehood to Uttaranchal and Vananchal (Jharkhand) and 33 percent reservation to women in legislatures.
    • During his second stint in 1999, Vajpayee’s government mooted the idea of a fixed term for Lok Sabha and State Vidhan Sabhas.
    • After the devastating tsunami of 2004, PM Manmohan Singh’s government used the President’s Address to announce the creation of a national law for disaster management.

    Procedure & tradition

    • In the days following the President’s address, a motion is moved in the two Houses thanking the President for his address.
    • This is an occasion for MPs in the two Houses to have a broad debate on governance in the country.
    • The PM replies to the motion of thanks in both Houses and responds to the issues raised by MPs.
    • The motion is then put to vote and MPs can express their disagreement by moving amendments to the motion.

    Role of the opposition

    • Opposition MPs have been successful in getting amendments passed to the motion of thanks in Rajya Sabha on five occasions (1980, 1989, 2001, 2015, 2016).
    • They have been less successful in Lok Sabha. For example in 2018, Lok Sabha MPs tabled 845 amendments of which 375 were moved and negated.

    Significance of the address

    • The President’s address is one of the most solemn occasions in the Parliamentary calendar.
    • It is the only occasion in the year when the entire Parliament, i.e. the President, Lok Sabha, and Rajya Sabha come together.
    • The event is associated with ceremony and protocol.
    • The Lok Sabha Secretariat prepares extensively for this annual event.
    • In the past, it used to get 150 yards of red baize cloth from the President’s house for the ceremonial procession.

  • The right of life and environment

    The article highlights how climate change impacts the constitutional values and promises by affecting the vulnerable disproportionately and suggest the distinctly Indian paradigm of development.

    How democratic values are threatened by climate change

    • Over the last seven decades, India has made distinct progress, but many core development challenges persist and we are yet to fulfill our constitutional promise.
    • Climate change will only exacerbate existing inequalities through a range of cascading and coinciding crises.
    • These words from the Preamble — justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity — serve as reminders of the daunting path to achieving social democracy, especially in a warming world.
    • B R Ambedkar had said that to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact it was essential not to be content with mere political democracy but to strive for social democracy as well.

    How climate change affects democratic values

    • Climate change is profoundly unjust.
    •  It will increasingly impinge upon our freedom of movement, and that it could deny equality of status and opportunity to millions of disadvantaged citizens like the forest-dwelling communities who have contributed least to the crisis and yet stand to be hit the hardest.
    • The evidence is clear that unless we rapidly move to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, vast swathes of India could be inhospitable due to floods, droughts, heatwaves, and increasingly erratic and unpredictable monsoon rains.

    Call for action against climate change

    • The fraternity can particularly serve as a call to action for the powerful to direct their resources towards shaping India’s response to climate change and “assuring the dignity of the individual”, as framed in the Preamble.
    • Indian business and philanthropy can play a key role in building resilience by encouraging innovation, complementing the role of the state, and securing citizens’ legislated rights.
    • Climate philanthropy can help develop and pilot new solutions and inspire ambitious political action.
    • A plethora of opportunities are currently on the margins but could become mainstream drivers for the three key pillars of jobs, growth, and sustainability.
    • A distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm powered by clean energy could play an integral role in fostering social and economic justice by uplifting millions of Indians.
    • Our nation’s welfare depends on healing the broken relationship between a broken economy and a broken ecology.

    Constitutional mandate to protect the environment

    • The right to life enshrined in Article 21 is increasingly interpreted as a right to environment.
    • When this is read together with Articles 48A and 51A(g), there is a clear constitutional mandate to protect the environment that will only grow more important in the coming decades for citizens and the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
    • Central to these considerations is the need for a uniquely Indian climate narrative, one that is both by and for Indians.

    Consider the question “Our constitutional values must guide us to a distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm to fulfil the constitutional commitment to its citizens. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    India can build its own pathway to become a climate leader aiming to secure a future where both people and nature can thrive. Much of this work can be rooted in the constitutional framework that binds together millions of Indians despite their myriad differences — a framework that is progressive in scope and ambitious in vision.

  • Petition in SC seeks Guidelines for Electronic Media

    The Supreme Court has decided to examine a petition seeking the framing of guidelines outlining the broad regulatory paradigm within which the right to free speech of broadcasters and electronic media can be judicially regulated.

    What is the petition about?

    • The petition wants the court to consider substantial questions of law, including whether the electronic media enjoys greater freedom than ordinary citizens and whether they could only be subject to self-regulation.
    • It has questioned whether free speech entails misinformation, fake news, hate speech, propaganda, paid news, communal and derogatory reportage, incitement, etc.
    • It has asked whether regulation will amount to the curtailment of the Press if done within the parameters specified under “reasonable restrictions” of Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
    • The plea said the right to life and dignity envisaged the right of citizens to “free, fair and proportionate media reporting”.

    What is Article 19(2)?

    • This article authorizes the government to impose, by law, reasonable restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression “in the interests of… public order.”
    • To understand the Supreme Court’s public order jurisprudence, it is important to break down the sub-clause into its component parts and focus upon their separate meanings.
    • Specifically, three terms are important: “reasonable restrictions”, “in the interests of”, and “public order”.
    • Clause (2) enables the legislature to impose certain restrictions on free speech under the following heads:
    1. Security of the State
    2. Friendly relations with foreign states
    3. Public order
    4. Decency and morality
    5. Contempt of court
    6. Defamation
    7. Incitement to an offense and
    8. Sovereignty and integrity of India
    • Reasonable restrictions on these grounds can be imposed only by a duly enacted law and not by executive action.

    The task before the court

    • The principal issue before the court is to bring about a balance between the right to freedom of speech and the expression of the media and various other rights.
    • These include the competing right to information of the citizenry, the right to reputation and dignity as well as the interest of preserving peace and harmony in the nation.

  • What is Non-price Competition?

    Data privacy can take the form of non-price competition and abuse of dominance can lower privacy protection, a study by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has said.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statements?

    (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution

    (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV

    (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III

    (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44th Amendment to the Constitution

    What is Non-price Competition?

    • Non-price competition is a marketing strategy “in which one firm tries to distinguish its product or service from competing products on the basis of attributes like design and workmanship”.
    • It often occurs in imperfectly competitive markets as it exists between two or more producers that sell goods and services at the same prices but compete through non-price measures.
    • Such measures include marketing schemes and greater quality or any sustainable competitive advantage other than price.

    What is CCI’s observation?

    • The CCI study made observations about non-price factors such as quality of service (QoS), data speeds etc. which are likely to be the new drivers of competitive rivalry between service providers in the telecom sector.
    • CCI noted that an aspect of data in the context of competition in digital communications market is the conflict between allowing access and protecting consumer privacy.

    Privacy at stake

    • Abuse of dominance can take the form of lowering the privacy protection and therefore fall within the ambit of antitrust as low privacy standard implies lack of consumer welfare.
    • Privacy can take the form of non-price competition, said the CCI.
    • On other non-price factors of competition, CCI found that consumers ranked network coverage at the top followed by customer service despite their Privacy.

  • Appointment of the Law Commission

    The Supreme Court has asked the Home and Law Ministries to explain the nearly three-year-long lapse in making appointments to the Law Commission.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.The power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in

    (a) The President of India

    (b) The Parliament

    (c) The Chief Justice of India

    (d) The Law Commission

    What is the news?

    • The posts of Chairperson and Members have been vacant ever since the 21st Law Commission under the former Supreme Court judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan completed its tenure in August.
    • The government approved the constitution of the 22nd Law Commission on February 19 last.
    • However, it has not appointed the Chairperson and Members to date.

    What is the Law Commission?

    • It is an executive body established by an order of the Government of India. The first law commission of independent India was established post Independence in 1955
    • Tenure: 3 Years
    • Function: Advisory body to the Ministry of Law and Justice for “Legal Reforms in India”
    • Recommendations: NOT binding
    • First Law Commission was established during the British Raj in 1834 by the Charter Act of 1833
    • Chairman: Macaulay; It recommended for the Codifications of the IPC, CrPC etc.

    Composition

    The 22nd Law Commission will be constituted for a period of three years from the date of publication of its Order in the Official Gazette. It will consist of:

    1. a full-time Chairperson;
    2. four full-time Members (including Member-Secretary)
    3. Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs as ex-officio Member;
    4. Secretary, Legislative Department as ex officio Member; and
    5. not more than five part-time Members.

    Terms of reference

    • The Law Commission shall, on a reference made to it by the Central Government or suo-motu, undertake research in law and review of existing laws in India for making reforms therein and enacting new legislations.
    • It shall also undertake studies and research for bringing reforms in the justice delivery systems for elimination of delay in procedures, speedy disposal of cases, reduction in the cost of litigation, etc.

    The Law Commission of India shall, inter-alia: –

    • identify laws that are no longer needed or relevant and can be immediately repealed
    • examine the existing laws in the light of DPSP and Preamble
    • consider and convey to the Government its views on any subject relating to law and judicial administration that may be specifically referred to it by the Government through Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • Consider the requests for providing research to any foreign countries as may be referred to it by the Government through the Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • take all such measures as may be necessary to harness law and the legal process in the service of the poor;
    • revise the Central Acts of general importance so as to simplify them and remove anomalies, ambiguities, and inequities

  • TN Governor to decide on Ex-PM assassin Pardon

    Tamil Nadu Governor would take a decision as per the Constitution in the next three or four days on the plea for release filed by A.G. Perarivalan, who is undergoing life imprisonment for the assassination of former PM Rajiv Gandhi in 1991.

    Give your personal views in favour and against Capital Punishment in the comment box.

    What is the news?

    • The court noted in its short order that the Solicitor General submitted that the application filed by the petitioner Perarivalan under Article 161 of the Constitution.
    • The TN State Cabinet had earlier made the recommendation to remit the life sentences of seven convicts, including Perarivalan in September 2018.
    • The new turn of events when the Additional Solicitor General for the Centre, had argued recently that the pleas for pardon and release should go to the President instead of the Governor.

    What does Pardon mean?

    • A pardon is a government/executive decision to allow a person to be absolved of guilt for an alleged crime or other legal offense as if the act never occurred.

    Why need a Pardon?

    • Pardons can be granted when individuals are deemed to have demonstrated that they have “paid their debt to society”, or are otherwise considered to be deserving of them.
    • Pardons are sometimes offered to persons who were either wrongfully convicted or who claim that they were wrongfully convicted.
    • Pardons are sometimes seen as a mechanism for combating corruption, allowing a particular authority to circumvent a flawed judicial process to free someone that is seen as wrongly convicted.

    What does Article 161 say?

    • Article 161 of the Constitution provides the Governor with the power to remit or commute the sentence of any prisoner.
    • The Governor’s decision will be subject to judicial review by the constitutional courts.

    Supreme court’s observations

    • The Constitution Bench in 2015, in a majority decision, had held that the States cannot unilaterally remit the sentences of life convicts in cases investigated by a Central agency under a Central law.
    • The assassination case was probed by the CBI.
    • In compliance with the 2015 verdict, the Tamil Nadu government wrote to the Centre in 2016, proposing the grant of remission to the convicts. The State wanted the Centre to concur.
    • After a wait of over two years, the Centre rejected the State’s proposal, saying this was an unparalleled act in the annals of crimes committed in this country.

    Arguments in Perarivalan’s petition seeking pardon

    • Perarivalan had been pleading for release citing that he was 19 when he was arrested.
    • He was the only male child of his parents, there were no records of criminal antecedents, and that he had excellent conduct in his entire prison life.
    • His petition also cited UG and PG degrees, and that he was the university topper, Gold medalist in diploma in DTP, and that he completed more than eight diploma and certificate courses during his prison term.
    • His probation officer gave a report about lapses in recording his confession statement that handed out maximum punishment in his case.

    Basis of his innocence

    • Perarivalan cannot be called innocent before the law as he continues to be a convicted prisoner serving imprisonment.
    • He was accused of having bought two battery cells for Sivarasan, the LTTE man who masterminded the conspiracy.
    • He was sentenced to death based on this crucial confession statement.

    Significance of the convicts’ release

    • The release of seven convicts is a demand raised by not only the ruling party of TN but the main opposition too.
    • All TN politicians voiced that the judiciary should be able to reform and let them live as good citizens to uphold the high values of reformatory justice and restitution.

  • WhatsApp’s contentious Privacy Policy

    The Government of India has asked WhatsApp to withdraw the proposed changes in its privacy policy.

    Q.What are the factors responsible for the spread of misinformation on social media? Suggest the measures to tackle it.

    Core of the news

    • WhatsApp has been embroiled in a controversy over its updated privacy policy.
    • The posts are pointers on the new policy.

    What was the news Privacy Policy?

    • When one goes to the status tab on the app, one can see the WhatsApp icon and its four posts, along with the statuses of one’s contacts.
    • While one reads ‘We are committed to your privacy’, another reads, ‘WhatsApp can’t read or listen to your personal conversations as they’re end-to-end encrypted’.
    • Another post reads ‘WhatsApp can’t see your shared location’ and yet another reads ‘WhatsApp doesn’t share your contacts with Facebook’.
    • The messaging app reviewed its privacy policy and asked users to accept the terms and conditions by February 8. Following this, the app faced severe backlash from its users and privacy advocates.

    Issues pointed by Govt.

    • said that the proposed changes raised “grave concerns” over the implications of the choice and the autonomy of Indian citizens.
    • It pointed out that the Indian users, who have not been given the option to opt-out of data-sharing with Facebook companies, were being subjected to differential treatment.
    • The issue is the impact it has on informational privacy, data security and user choice.

    Data at stake

    • The government asked WhatsApp to reconsider its approach to respect the informational privacy, freedom of choice and data security of Indian citizens.
    • It said that India’s distinct identity and its people must be properly respected and any unilateral changes to WhatsApp Terms of Service and Privacy would not be fair and acceptable.

    A discriminatory move

    • India formed the largest segment of WhatsApp’s user base globally and any change in policies would have a disproportionate impact on its citizens.
    • The privacy policy offered by WhatsApp to its European users specifically prohibits the use of any information shared with a Facebook company for those companies’ own purposes.
    • This Clause is not present in the privacy policy offered to Indian users.
    • This differential and discriminatory treatment of Indian and European users is attracting serious criticism and betrays a lack of respect for the rights and interest of Indian citizens.

    What lies ahead?

    • India has a huge user base of WhatsApp and Facebook in India.
    • The consolidation of sensitive information exposes a very large segment of Indian citizens to greater information security risks.
    • By not providing Indian users with the ability to opt-out of this data sharing with other Facebook companies, WhatsApp is treating users with an ‘all-or-nothing’ approach.

  • Supreme Court directive on Quota in Promotions

    The Supreme Court has asked Attorney General to compile the various issues being raised by States with regard to the 2006 M. Nagaraj case, which had upheld the application of creamy layer principle to members of the SC/ST communities in promotions.

    Must read edition: Reservation not a Fundamental Right

    What is the case about?

    • The Centre’s plea came despite the Supreme Court, in September 2018, in Jarnail Singh case, reiterating the Nagaraj judgment of 2006.
    • The 2006 judgment required the States to show quantifiable data to prove the ‘backwardness’ of a community to provide quota in promotion in public employment,
    • The 2018 judgment, which was authored by Justice Rohinton F. Nariman, had refused the government’s plea to refer the 2006 Nagaraj judgment to a seven-judge Bench.
    • It had while modifying the part of the Nagaraj verdict, rejected the Centre’s argument that Nagaraj misread the creamy layer concept by applying it to SC/ST.

    Nagaraj Case

    • In Jarnail Singh vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018), the court dealt with a batch of appeals on the correctness of the Supreme Court’s judgment in M Nagaraj & Others vs Union of India (2006).
    • The Nagaraj case, in turn, had arisen out of a challenge to the validity of four Constitution amendments, which the court eventually upheld.

    What were the amendments?

    • 77th Amendment: It introduced Clause 4A to the Constitution, empowering the state to make provisions for reservation in matters of promotion to SC/ST employees if the state feels they are not adequately represented.
    • 81st Amendment: It introduced Clause 4B, which says unfilled SC/ST quota of a particular year, when carried forward to the next year, will be treated separately and not clubbed with the regular vacancies of that year to find out whether the total quota has breached the 50% limit set by the Supreme Court.
    • 82nd Amendment: It inserted a proviso at the end of Article 335 to enable the state to make any provision for SC/STs “for relaxation in qualifying marks in any examination or lowering the standards of evaluation, for reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of services or posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State”.
    • 85th Amendment: It said reservation in the promotion can be applied with consequential seniority for the SC/ST employee.

    What is Art.335 about?

    • Article 335 of the Constitution relates to claims of SCs and STs to services and posts.
    • It reads: “The claims of the members of the SC’s and ST’s shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State.”

  • How horizontal, vertical quotas work; what Supreme Court said?

    The Supreme Court last month clarified the position of law on the interplay of vertical and horizontal reservations.

    This newscard is useful for GS paper 1 as well as aspirants with sociology optional. Let us know in the comment box if you want to get a deeper insight.

    It perfectly highlights the heart of the debate on “merit versus reservation”, where reservation is sometimes projected as being anti-merit.

    What are vertical and horizontal reservations?

    • Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes is referred to as vertical reservation.
    • It applies separately for each of the groups specified under the law.
    • Horizontal reservation refers to the equal opportunity provided to other categories of beneficiaries such as women, veterans, the transgender community, and individuals with disabilities, cutting through the vertical categories.

    How are the two categories of quotas applied together?

    • The horizontal quota is applied separately to each vertical category, and not across the board.
    • For example, if women have 50% horizontal quota, then half of the selected candidates will have to necessarily be women in each vertical quota category.
    • This means half of all selected SC candidates will have to be women, half of the unreserved or general category will have to be women, and so on.
    • The interlocking of the two types of reservation throws up a host of questions on how certain groups are to be identified.
    • For example, would an SC woman be put in the category of women or SC? Since quotas are fixed in percentages, what percentage of quota would be attributed to each?

    What was the Saurav Yadav case about?

    • The case was on the technicalities that form a substantial question of law.
    • It was this: Two aspirants had secured 276.5949 and 233.1908 marks respectively.
    • They had applied under the categories of OBC-Female and SC-Female respectively. OBC and SC are vertical reservation categories, while Female is a horizontal reservation category.
    • The two candidates did not qualify in their categories.
    • However, in the General-Female (unreserved-female) category, the last qualifying candidate had secured 274.8298 marks, a score that was lower than the two backwards.
    • The question before the court was that if the underlying criterion for making selections is “merit”.

    What did the court decide?

    • The court ruled against the UP government.
    • It observed if a person belonging to an intersection of the vertical-horizontal reserved category had secured scores high enough to qualify without the vertical reservation.
    • It held that the person would be counted as qualifying without the vertical reservation, and cannot be excluded from the horizontal quota in the general category.
    • If a person in the SC category secures a higher score than the cut-off for the general category, the person would be counted as having qualified under the general category instead of the SC quota.

    What was the government’s argument?

    • The government’s policy was to restrict and contain reserved category candidates to their categories, even when they had secured higher grades.
    • The court said this was tantamount to ensuring that the general category was ‘reserved’ for upper castes.

    What was the court’s reasoning?

    • The court did the math by examining a number of hypothetical scenarios.
    • It concluded that if both vertical and horizontal quotas were to be applied together — and consequently, a high-scoring candidate who would otherwise qualify without any reservation.
    • On the other hand, if a high-scoring candidate is allowed to drop one category, the court found that the overall selection would reflect more high-scoring candidates.
    • In other words, the “meritorious” candidates would be selected.

  • Personal Data Protection Bill 2019

    The Personal Data Protection Bill (2019) has several provisions which could have implications for the privacy of an individual. The article examines such provisions and highlights the need for further debate on the Bill.

    Evolution of privacy as a fundamental right

    • The Supreme Court in MP Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954) and Kharak Singh v. Uttar Pradesh (1962) had declared that while in certain circumstances the privacy of individuals was to be protected, there was no constitutional right to privacy in and of itself.
    • However, in Puttuswamy v India (2017) the Supreme Court accepted privacy as a fundamental right.
    • This was an important development.

    Rising importance of data

    • The rising importance of data has pushed over 80 countries to pass national laws protecting the collection and use of their citizens’ data by companies and the government.
    • The DPB will have huge commercial and political consequences for India.
    • In India, the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 (DPB) is currently under consideration by a parliamentary committee.
    • According to Ernst and Young, emerging technologies in India will create $1 trillion in economic value by 2025.
    • Much of this value will be founded on the creation, use, and sale of data, and the DPB will have immense implications as firms scramble to meet new privacy regulations.

    Conditions for access to data and issues

    • The bill establishes a number of conditions for companies to follow.
    • For one, it would require digital firms to obtain permission from users before collecting their data.
    • It also declares that users who provide data are, in effect, the owners of their own data.
    • So that the users will be able to control the data their online selves produce, and may request firms to delete it, just as European internet-users’ “right to be forgotten”.
    • But the bill stipulates that critical or sensitive personal data, related to information such as religion, or to matters of national security, must be accessible to the government if needed to protect national interest.
    • Critics have suggested that such open-ended access could lead to misuse.
    • Even B N Srikrishna, who chaired the committee that drafted the original bill has also expressed concerns about this provision.
    • Other major concern is about Data Protection Authority (DPA).

    Concerns about Data Protection Authority

    • The bill outlines the establishment of a Data Protection Authority (DPA).
    • The DPA will be charged with managing data collected by the Aadhaar programme.
    • It will be led by a chairperson and six committee members, appointed by the central government on the recommendation of a selection committee.
    • But this selection committee will be composed of senior civil servants, raising questions about the board’s independence.
    • The government’s power to appoint and remove members at its discretion also stokes fears about its ability to influence this independent agency.
    • Unlike similar institutions, such as the Reserve Bank of India or the Securities and Exchange Board, the DPA will not have an independent expert or member of the judiciary on its governing committee.

    Consider the question “Discuss the various provision of Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 for the protection of individual’s privacy. What are the concerns over the various provisions of the Bill?”

    Conclusion

    The DPB is a unique opportunity for India, a country with some 740 million internet users, to forge a pathbreaking agenda that will act as a standard-setter in the still-developing field of national data protection legislation.