Privacy Issues and RTI

Similar documents
Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, National Informatics Centre **** CIRCULAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. WP(C) No.3114/2007. Reserved on : November 19, Date of decision : December 03, 2007.

THE WHISTLE BLOWERS PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015

No. 1/4/2008-IR Government of India Ministry of Personnel, P.G. and Pensions Department of Personnel & Training *****

Central Information Commission, New Delhi , SM, CIC/SM/A/2011/000181, , , , ,

THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2011

Bar & Bench (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL. Date of decision: 4th December, 2012 MAC. APP.

REGULATION MAKING POWER OF CERC

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

No. 07/GEN/DOP Dated:

Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) Central Information Commissioner CIC/NCFWO/A/2017/191483

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R %

Sailent Features of the Act

SUBAS H.MAHTO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW F.Y.LLM

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

Table 1: Ultra vires, Repugnant, Deficient and Redundant Provisions made under Orissa RTI Rules vis-à-vis RTI Act 2005.

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1692 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No of 2012) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1693 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No.

CHAPTER VII PROSECUTION. 1.Sanction for prosecution

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECRUITMENT MATTER. W.P.(C) No. 8347/2010. Date of Decision: Versus

Industrial Relations Amendment (Public Sector Conditions of Employment) Act 2011 No 13

AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA

O.M THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA NEW DELHI. IA No. 5 of 2014 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 833 of BETWEEN: Aruna Roy and another Petitioners

ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION ACT AND MEDIATION

Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Children s Guardian) Act 2013 No 31

Madras High Court Madras High Court N.Rajachandrasekaran vs The Secretary To Government on 12 June, 2009 DATE :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: EHTESHAM QUTUBUDDIN SIDDIQUE. versus

HAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND

abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 478 OF 2008

J U D G M E N T (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5124/06) A.K. MATHUR, J.

Impounding of A Passport - Ambiguity of Applicable Laws Vis. a Vis. Defaulter s Delight

VISION IAS

The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 [As amended by the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 No. 43 of 2006]

THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR CHILDREN BILL, DRAFT BILL. Chapter-I. Preliminary

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS ON CENTRAL TAXES BILL, 2007

Through Mr. Ashok Gurnani, Advocate with petitioner in person. VERSUS

THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2012

AS INTRODUCED IN THE RAJYA SABHA THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL BILL, 2005 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA THE CHAIRMAN POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

Suggestions of the National Campaign for Peoples Right to Information (NCPRI) on the proposed RTI Rules, 2017

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 29 th March, LPA No.777/2010

(i) THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTAS BILL, 2011 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES PART I PRELIMINARY. 1. Short title, extent, application and commencement.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 147 OF 2018 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

Identification Legislation Amendment Act 2011 No 45

A.F.R. ***** This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT. Crl. M.C. No. 2183/2011. Reserved on: 18th January, 2012

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Delhi Rent Control Act R.C.REV.29/2012 Date of Decision: Versus

Arbitration: An Emerging Litigation!

Parliamentary Privileges and Immunities in the light of various Judicial Decisions

BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

24 Appeals and Revision

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. W.P. No.750/2017. Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M.

Bar & Bench ( IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO(s) OF 2016

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:11 th December, Through: Mr Rajat Aneja, Advocate. Versus AND. CM (M)No.

Central Excise Duty on free Samples

THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (AMENDMENT AND VALIDATION) BILL, 2013

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) AMENDMENT ACT, 2006

The Protection of Human Rights Act, No 10 of 1994

Judicial Analysis of the Powers and Functions of the Administrative Tribunals

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi

THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP BILL, 2008

1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes

THE WHISTLE BLOWERS PROTECTION ACT, 2014 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

No. 1/5/2016-IR Govt. of India Mlnistrty of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions Department of Personnel & Training

Case Summary Suresh Kumar Koushal and another v NAZ Foundation and others Supreme Court of India: Civil Appeal No of 2013

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat

The Draft Right to Information Ordinance 2008

BOARD OF ELECTIONS IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015

Twelfth Kerala Legislative Assembly Bill No. 301 THE REGISTRATION (KERALA AMENDMENT) BILL, Kerala Legislature Secretariat 2009

THE BLACK MONEY (UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN INCOME AND ASSETS) AND IMPOSITION OF TAX BILL, 2015

Appendix C THE REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS (PROTECTION) BILL, ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title, extent and

Kerala Legislature Secretariat 2008

THE HIGH COURT COMMERCIAL

THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS ACT, 1986

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F June 4, 2018 ALBERTA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. Case File Number F8587

Legislative Brief The Information Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2006

APPENDIX. National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992

Quasi Judicial. Justice (R) Shabbir Ahmed

STIFLING PRIVACY AND INHIBITING DEMOCRACY: A CASE FOR AADHAAR SCHEME IN INDIA

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms Part of our written constitution

THE BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE CESS (KERALA AMENDMENT) BILL, Kerala Legislature Secretariat 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.

to the Government Gazette of Mauritius No. 14 of 14 February 2009

Data Protection Bill [HL]

THE WHISTLE BLOWERS PROTECTION BILL, 2011

income tax procedure starts with the Assessee filing Return of income. The first stage after the filing of Return of income is the Assessement of the

790 THE PUNJAB LAW REPORTER (2018)1 SCeJ

Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Amendment Act 2009 No 22

THE COMPETITION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2012

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

No. 1 of Audit Act Certified on: / /20.

Transcription:

Presentation by Narayan Varma at a Seminar on RTI-Key to Good Governance organised by ISTM, DOPT, Government of India On 29.10.2010 Privacy Issues and RTI INDEX 1. Introduction 2. Article 21 of the Constitution of India SC s interpretation to include Privacy in it 3. Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act 4. Reference to Full Bench decision of Delhi H.C. dated 12.01.2010 in Secretary General, Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal 5. Analysis of section 8(1)(j) Personal CIC s full bench decision dated 23.04.2010 It must not have been disclosed to the public authority as a part of public activity The disclosure would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy Larger Public Interest Subsection 8(2) 6. General Conclusion

One American writer has said: One man s freedom of information is another man s invasion of privacy. The personal information of an individual need not be made public in every case as he has a right to be left alone which now has been recognised as a fundamental right the world over...1..

Article 21 of the Constitution of India: 21. Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The Supreme Court has ruled, modelled on the decisions of the US Supreme Court, with regard to privacy. The Court observed in R. Rajagopal Alias R.R. Gopal v. State of T N (1994) 6 SCC 632: The right to privacy is implicit in the right of life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of this country by article 21. It is a right to be left alone. A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood and education among other matters. None can publish anything concerning the above matters without his consent. If he does so, he would be violating the right to privacy of the person concerned and would be liable in action for damages...2..

Article 19 of the constitution of India reads: All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. That right, as per the Supreme Court of India includes Right to Information. Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act: 8(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information : Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person...3..

Landmark judgment of Delhi high Court (F.B) pronounced on 12.01.2010 In Secretary General, Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal: The full bench of the Delhi H.C. concurred with the view of the learned single judge that the contents of asset declarations, pursuant to the 1997 Resolution, are entitled to be treated as personal information, and may be accessed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under section 8(1)(j); and that they are not otherwise subject to disclosure. Therefore, as regards the contents of the declarations, whenever applicants approach the authorities under the Act, they would have to satisfy themselves under section 8(1)(j) that such disclosure is warranted in larger public interest...4..

Privacy issues & RTI Section 8(1)(j) talks of personal information Dictionary defines: person as human being, an individual personal as relating to or affecting an individual Hence, 8(1) (j) only covers natural persons, i.e. individuals, it covers privacy of the individuals only. Hence, other entities like companies, HUF, trusts etc are not covered under this clause and any information on them cannot be affected by the exemption u/s.8 (1)(j). 5.1

Re. Individual s personal information gets exemption under this clause on three criteria: 1. It must be personal information Personal information here has reference to the third party s information and not one s own Extract from a full bench decision (5 members of the Central Information Commission) dated 23.04.2007 explaining the scope and ambit of this clause: (Para 32) In this case there were six applicants/complainants and 5 public authorities. Out of 5 Information Commissioner, three are presently in chair, two have retired This Section has to be read as a whole. If that were done, it would be apparent that personal information does not mean information relating to the information seeker, but about third party. That is why, in the Section, it is stated unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. If one were to seek information about oneself or one s own case, the question of invasion of privacy of one s own self does not arise. If one were to ask information about a third party and if it were to invade the privacy of the individual, the information seeker can be denied the information on the ground that disclosure would invade the privacy of a third party. Therefore, when a citizen seeks information about his own case and as long as the information sought is not exempt in terms of other provisions of Section 8 of RTI Act, this clause cannot be applied to deny the information. Thus, denial for inspection/verification of his own answer sheets by a citizen applying the provisions of section 8(1)(j) is not sustainable. 5.2

2. It must not have been disclosed to the public authority as a part of public activity. When a citizen provides information in discharge of a statutory obligation, it is a disclosure as a part of public activity. Same cannot be exempted under this clause. Income-tax return Yes; The Assessment Order No. Names of persons who applied for arms licenses See: Mr. Jagvesh Kumar Sharma, New Delhi vs. PIO, govt. of NCT of Delhi Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2008/00993 dated 16.3.2009 One para there of: Various Public authorities in performing their functions routinely ask for personal information from Citizens, and this is clearly a public activity. When a person applies for a job, or gives information about himself to a Public Authority as an employee, or asks for permission, license or authorisation, all these are public activities. Applying for an arms license certainly falls in this category. As a matter of fact Section 4 (1) (b) (xii) requires a suo moto publishing of particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorizations granted by it; 5.3

3. The disclosure of the information would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual The right of privacy is an evolving right and the extent of its strength & reach is different in different countries. The concept of privacy is most often associated with western culture. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 12 states: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. In India, this right is not very deep. It would depend on each case to determine whether privacy is invaded in a unwarranted manner or not. In fact, as regards UID project, privacy right is extensively invaded and many civil society individuals are disturbed about it. Various representations have been made to the Authority through civil society meetings & discussions. In response, the Government has set up a Group of officers under the Secretary, DOPT to develop frameworks for data protection, security and privacy. What is unwarranted invasion of privacy of a person cannot be enlisted exhaustively. However cases have arisen before numerous adjudicative bodies on the issue of invasion of privacy arising out of the requests to furnish information under the RTI Act. To cite an example is the case before the Central Information Commission in Mr. Harish Lamba vs Indian Council of Medical Research CIC/AD/A/20009/0010371 dated 2nd September, 2009. The Commission denied to provide information about expenses on education of the children of members of the Committee u/s 8(1)(j) as it was held to be personal information disclosure of which will cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of individuals constituting the Project Review Committee. 5.4

Assuming that this clause is applicable after undergoing above 3 criteria, still it is overridden by Unless the PIO or AA is satisfied that larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. Such matters could be: criminal activity of any individual tax evasion matter medical related information on Prime Ministers and the Presidents of India Para from the decision in Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sharma vs. PIO, Govt of NCT of Delhi Decision No. CIC/AT/A/2008/01262/SG/2109 dated 27.2.2009: The test of public interest is to be applied to give information, only if any of the exemptions of Section 8 apply. Even if the exemptions apply, the Act enjoins that if there is a larger Public interest, the information would still have to be given. There is no requirement in the Act of establishing any public interest for information to be obtained by the sovereign Citizen; nor is there any requirement to establish larger Public interest, unless an exemption is held to be valid. Para from the Decision No. CIC/OK/A/2008/00860/SG/0809 dated 31.12.2008: The concept of public interest cannot be invoked for denial of information. The Section empowers the Public Information Officer to provide the exempted information if it is in the larger public interest; meaning thereby that access to the exempted information can be allowed if public interest is served in providing the information. 5.5

Conclusion: RTI Act is an extremely powerful Act and a short Act of only 31 sections. It is the opinion of all civil society members that it does not need any amendments yet. However, I believe it needs some interpretations, authentic and well considered by CIC backed by legal luminaries. Act has many nebulous words & phrases and sentences, the meaning of which differs from person to person and bench to bench and state to state and so on. e.g. substantially financed in sec. 2(h) defining public authority Provisions of section 8(1)(j) etc. Public Concern for Governance Trust has RTI-Helpline: 09322882288. It also mails articles on RTI written by Narayan Varma to hundreds of RTI friends. If you desire to be on mailing list, you may give your e-mail ID now or mail at publicconcern@gmail.com and/or Narayanvarma2011@gmail.com 6