Pegasus inquiry must reverse the ‘chilling effect’

News: Pegasus controversy has raised many questions on the privacy right of citizens.

What is Pegasus? Why there is so much controversy surrounding it?

How did different governments handle the Pegasus controversy?

USA: The government blacklisted the NSO group by putting it on an “entity list”.

India: The government has not taken any strict action. Even the RTI is filed on seeking government response on whether the government had purchased the Pegasus was met with the response is like no information available. The government was tight-lipped in Parliament and even a Parliamentary inquiry into the matter was quashed.

What is the Supreme court’s reaction to Pegasus?

Given the seriousness of the matter and the right to privacy of citizens, SC appointed an inquiry committee to look into the issue.

What is the Supreme Court’s stance on privacy?

In R. Rajagopal case 1994: Though privacy was not a specifically guaranteed right earlier, unabated surveillance was never allowed.

2017 case judgement: SC said that the Right to privacy is as sacrosanct as human existence and is inalienable to human dignity and autonomy.

Court judgement on Privacy: Court restricts the conditions on snooping. It can be done only on 3 grounds.

1) the restriction must be by law; it must be necessary and only if other means are not available  2) It must be proportionate (only as much as needed) 3) It must promote a legitimate state interest (e.g. national security)

Source: This post is based on the article “Pegasus inquiry must reverse the ‘chilling effect’” published in The Hindu on 16th November 2021.