This article is written by Sankalp Mirani of MNLU, Mumbai.
Privacy is a myth in the present times.
We have created a new world in which communication, information sharing, and lifestyle exposure are better and more profitable, but there are always some disadvantages. Information technology has promoted the emergence of the internet and its breadth of access. In this blog, I examine India's Right to Forgotten (RTBF) concept. Right to privacy is aligned with RTBF. The individual's right to restrict or remove public access to personal information, such as in the workplace or online, is known as the Right to Forget. The Supreme Court recommended the Right to Privacy as an essential component of Article 21. The Right to Life and Personal Liberty were discussed in the landmark 2017 K.S. Puttaswamy trial judgment, which found that the right to privacy is protected by Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
What is Privacy?
The right to privacy is to be left alone and not to act violently or abusively. Privacy is an essential aspect of human existence. More importantly, the privacy of the data becomes more important as more data is digitized and distributed or linked online. The way data is handled according to its value is referred to as "data privacy."
According to Article 21 of the India Constitution, "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law," the right to privacy is guaranteed.
India lacks a comprehensive privacy and data protection law. The attainment of such a right has become increasingly challenging due to the development of technology and social media. Since the 1960s, privacy was regarded as a common law right and a fundamental right under the Constitution.
History:
In MP Sharma v. Satish Chandra, the Supreme Court ruled that privacy was not a fundamental right in 1954. During a search warrant, the court dismissed the existence of the right to privacy on the basis of the constitutional makers. Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Gobind v. State of Madhya Pradesh are additional cases. also evidence of the stakeholders affected by the privacy breach. For instance, given the growing evidence that provincial governments are already utilizing Aadhaar to create a database for the purpose of compiling a citizen profile, data security and restrictions on data collection and profile creation may be areas where Aadhaar may face future privacy issues.
Current Issues:
The need to interfere with the state's fundamental rights was upheld three times by the Supreme Court. To safeguard the state's interests, the state can intervene.
• According to A21 of the constitution, there must be legislation that will allow breaches of confidentiality.
• Article 14 must reasonably determine the limitation law's nature and content.
• Legislatively approved procedures.
Therefore, the Justice BN Srikrishna Committee's 2018 Personal Data Protection Bill will serve as a basis for the evaluation and consideration of any regulations intended to violate the RTBF. The Bill safeguards citizens from identity theft, which includes the stealing of financial and criminal information. The Information Technology Act of 2000, on the other hand, contains the Right to Privacy, which prohibits unauthorized access and is one of the new laws and regulations in effect.
By recognizing rights like the right to express one's sexual orientation, the right to religious expression, the right to data protection, and so on, the RTBF ensures that freedom of expression is safeguarded. The Human DNA Profiling Bill was recently approved by the Law Commission. All of this raises the possibility of data breaches.
Suggestions/Conclusions
First, the strict data protection law is the best way to effectively use this right against any citizen. However, in order for that to occur, the bill must be ratified by the Act, which is a requirement in this digital age to safeguard individuals from harm or disruption.
Second, despite the fact that the Data Protection Bill has not yet been enacted into law, the courts have made it abundantly clear that individuals have the right to forget. People may also use other laws to protect this right, such as the defamation statute or the right to file a complaint to get their basic privacy right now.
The right of every person to enjoy their life and freedom without having their privacy, family, or correspondence harmed in any way is inextricably linked to the protection of personal information. The term "confidentiality" ought to be withheld, in contrast to the public. In many legal actions, it is necessary to locate legal provisions that govern the same.