News Cubic Studio

Truth and Reality

Espionage scandal: Center will not file affidavit on Pegasus, Supreme Court said – now order is the only option

Pegasus Snooping Row: During the hearing, the central government made it clear that it is not going to file an affidavit on this matter. The government said that this is not a matter of public domain, so filing the affidavit would not be correct.

The hearing was held on Monday in the Supreme Court regarding the Pegasus espionage case. During the hearing, the central government made it clear that it was not going to file an affidavit in this matter. The government said that it is not a matter of public discussion. Therefore, the affidavit cannot be filed. But she has agreed to set up a panel to probe the allegations of espionage.

At the same time, Chief Justice Ramanna was not satisfied with this reply of the government and expressed displeasure and said that we have to know whether anyone can use spyware? Did the government use it? Was it done legally? If the government does not want to file the affidavit, then we will have to pass an interim order.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta replied to the court
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the central government, said that various types of software are used by security and military agencies to investigate terrorist activities. If the government makes it public, then terrorists or anti-national forces will misuse it. It is feared that the terrorists will be saved from tracking by modifying it. Mehta said that the central government is ready to place all the facts regarding monitoring before an expert technical committee, which can give a report to the court.

Supreme Court expressed displeasure
Supreme Court Chief Justice NV Ramanna slammed the central government on the Pegasus issue, saying that you are going back on the same point again and again. We want to know what the government was doing till now. We are not going towards issues of national interest. Our limited concern is about the people. The appointment of the committee is not an issue. The purpose of the affidavit is to let us know what you are doing.

Supreme Court asks Center to reconsider
The Supreme Court asked the government to mention the Pegasus case before the court if it reconsiders filing a fresh affidavit as it would take two to three days to pass an interim order.

We don’t want defense, security related information
During the hearing, the bench repeatedly said, we do not want any information related to defence, security. Justice Surya Kant said, before us there are petitioners who are alleging violation of rights through illegal use of spyware. We only want to know the side of the government from the detailed affidavit in this matter. The petitioners have requested for a direction to the Cabinet Secretary to file an affidavit. The bench referred to the statement of former IT minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, which admitted to the alleged spying from Pegasus spyware. On this, Mehta said that IT Minister Vaishnav has clarified the situation in this matter.

Necessary to investigate Pegasus in both cases : Congress

On Pegasus, the Congress again reiterated that the government should tell in one line whether it bought this weapon or not, and if it was bought, then on which of the four pillars the country was used.

Spokesperson Gaurav Vallabh said that Home Minister Amit Shah wrote a blog on Pegasus. Write a line whether Pegasus has been bought by any ministry of the country or not. The Prime Minister would have made a tweet on whether Pegasus has been bought or not and if you have bought it, then why do you want to give a dent to the four pillars of our country. If not bought then why foreign spyware without the approval of the Indian government, how was that weapon used on the people of India? In both the cases there is dire need of investigation.

If the answer is no, then foreign spyware is being used on the people of the country without the permission of the government, there cannot be a bigger national security breach than this. In both the cases investigation will have to be done. The question is not pressing.