Pegasus Espionage Case : Supreme Court said – Had the Center clarified its stand, the situation would have been different, we should not fall into the political quagmire
On the contention of the Central Government in the Pegasus case, the Supreme Court said that the government should prove the argument that the disclosure of the information sought would have a bearing on national security. The top court said, it would have been a different situation had the central government clarified its stand in the matter instead of filing a limited affidavit on August 16.
The bench said that the petitioners have put on record certain material which prima facie deserves consideration by the Supreme Court. The bench said that in view that the Center has not denied the allegations, we have no option but to accept the demand of inquiry into the allegations made by the petitioners. The top court had on September 13 reserved its order in the matter as the central government had said that it cannot make public whether its agencies have used spyware from Israel as such disclosure is in national interest. would be against.
Trying to maintain the rule of law without getting affected by political noise
The Supreme Court, which appointed an expert committee in the Pegasus espionage scandal, in its order on Wednesday said its endeavor is to maintain the rule of law without getting bogged down by political ruckus. She is analyzing allegations of use, need and misuse of the technology. It is also trying to uphold the aspirations of the Constitution, as Orwellian’s petitions in the espionage case raise concerns.
‘If you want to keep a secret, keep it hidden from yourself’, Chief Justice Justice NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli began with this statement from the 1984 novel by English novelist George Orwell, born in Motihari, Bihar. . He said, the petitions raise Orwellian concerns. Orwellian means totalitarian government’s propaganda, strict surveillance, misleading information, lies and ruling the citizens by discrediting and suppressing the name of historical personalities.
Orwell called it harmful to a free and open society. The court said, the court has always been alert that it does not fall into the political quagmire, but has also not shied away from stopping the exploitation of the fundamental rights of citizens. The Committee of the Court is completely independent. Justice must be done and justice must be seen to be done. Everyone wants to protect the right to privacy. Technology should be used in the public interest.
Privacy is the ability and freedom to make choices
▪️The Supreme Court said, we are living in the era of information revolution. A person’s entire life can be saved in cloud storage or in a digital file. We have to understand that while technology is improving lives, our privacy can also be breached. Not only journalists or social workers, all members of a democratic civilized society want privacy intact. On the strength of this, we can exercise the ability and freedom to make choices.
▪️The Supreme Court, while referring to privacy rights in America and England, said that there it was kept property-centered rather than people. In the historic Semen case, it was said ‘every man’s house is his fortress’.
Rain water can come to the poor’s hut, not the king
Referring to the statement of British politician William Pitt, the Supreme Court said, ‘The poorest man can disobey all the powers of the emperor even by staying in his hut. Its roof may be rough, a stormy wind may make it tremble, rainwater may come in, but the King of England cannot come in. Even if the house is in ruins, the entire army of the king cannot cross his threshold. This is the law.
Life and privacy are intertwined
In the context of several examples, the Supreme Court said, in India the right to privacy is linked to the right to life. Our constitution has given a broad definition to the right to life by not limiting it like the conservatives. It also included a higher standard of living, it was not seen as a mere survival of an animal.
Recommendation : Suggestions sought on setting up of National Cyber Security and Investigation Agency
◾Law making and reform : The committee can give its recommendations for making new laws related to monitoring or for improving and amending existing laws. This will further strengthen the right to privacy. The security of the country will be better especially in cyber matters.
◾Protection of privacy : Recommendations will be given to prevent intrusion into the privacy of citizens. Suggest a mechanism for filing complaints against illegal espionage.
◾Formation of an independent agency : The committee will recommend the establishment of a full-fledged national agency. The agency will investigate vulnerabilities and vulnerabilities related to cyber security. Detect and investigate cyber attacks and threats.
◾Immediate Measures : Suggests immediate measures, which can protect civil rights.
when what happened
◾July 18 : The disclosure of spyware in many countries including India from Pegasus, military-level spyware (espionage software) made by the Israeli company.
◾July 22 : Filed a petition in the Supreme Court to form an SIT under its supervision.
◾July 27: Journalists N Ram and Shashi Kumar also petitioned the Supreme Court for an independent investigation.
◾August 5 : Court begins hearing on the petition.
◾August 16 : The government in a brief affidavit called the allegations, estimates based on unconfirmed media reports.
◾August 17 : Notice issued to the Center on the petitions.
◾September 13 : Court reserves the decision.
Investigation will be done under their supervision
▪️Justice RV Raveendran recused himself from hearing in Ambani case as his daughter worked in a firm advising Mukesh Ambani
▪️Former Supreme Court Justice Raju Varadarajulu Raveendran started his career as a lawyer in March 1968.
▪️He became a permanent Judge of the Karnataka High Court in 1993 and Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2004. Promoted to Supreme Court in September 2005. Served here till October 2011 i.e. about 6 years. During this, decisions were given to maintain the law of OBC reservation in central educational institutions, called several milestones.
▪️Governors of UP, Gujarat, Haryana, Goa were included in the five-member Constitution Bench to decide the PIL on the removal of the President. The bench ruled in July 2004 that governors cannot be removed on the ground that they do not conform to the policies or ideology of the ruling political party at the Centre.
▪️In 2009, Justice Raveendran recused himself from the Ambani brothers’ gas dispute trial, saying his daughter worked for a law firm that advised the Mukesh Ambani group on some other matter.
▪️RM Lodha was a member of the committee formed to reform the BCCI. In 2017, the Supreme Court had entrusted the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to oversee the probe into the Hadiya case. There were allegations of forced conversion of Hadiya after her marriage to a Muslim youth. He denied this responsibility.
These officers will be assistants to the monitoring committee chief
◾Alok Joshi : 1976 batch IPS officer (retired). Joshi is considered an officer with deep knowledge in the technical field. Joint Director of Intelligence Bureau. He has also held the post of Secretary of Intelligence Agency RAW and President of National Technical Research Organization.
◾Dr. Sandeep Oberoi : Co-chairman of International Standards Organization, International Electro-Technical Commission and Joint Technical Committee. The committee prepares standards for software products and systems. Consultant at the Center for Cyber Security Education and Research, Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology, Delhi.
Expert trinity of inquiry committee : Prof. Naveen Kumar Choudhary: 20 years of experience in Cyber Security
Dean of National Forensic Science University, Gandhinagar. Professor of Cyber Security and Digital Forensics, Naveen has been in the academic field for over 20 years. Also, there are experts in cyber security, cyber policy, network loopholes.
Pro. Charge P: Expertise in finding security loopholes
Professor of Engineering at Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeeth Kerala. Working in computer science and security for over two decades. Experts in device malware detection, basic security, complex binary analysis, artificial intelligence and machine learning.
Ashwin Anil Gumaste : Has 20 patents and 150 publications to his name
Associate Professor at the Institute of Computer Science and Engineering, IIT Bombay. Obtained 20 US patents. 150 papers published in reputed journals. He has also written three books. Winner of Vikram Sarabhai Award and SS Bhatnagar Award.
These points will be investigated
▪️Is Pegasus used in phones and other devices? What happened to these devices, like accessing stored data, listening to microphone conversations, receiving notifications?
▪️What steps did the Center take after the Indian WhatsApp account was reported hacked through Pegasus in 2019?
▪️Has the Government of India, any State Government or any of these agencies acquired Pegasus spyware for use on an Indian citizen?
▪️If they did, then under what law, rule, guideline, protocol or legal process was it used on citizens? Was it authorized if any other Indian citizen or entity used it?
Other related aspects, which the Committee may consider useful.
In the course of investigation, the statement of any person will be allowed to be recorded
The Supreme Court has clarified in its order that the technical committee will be allowed to record the statement of any person and call for records from any authority or person in the course of investigation of the Pegasus case, as well as the committee will be allowed to conduct any inquiry. shall have such liberty as he deems fit. There will be no compulsion in this.
Pegasus is an attack on democratic set-up, not politics : Congress
Congress has welcomed the Supreme Court’s order to set up a committee to investigate the Pegasus case. Rahul Gandhi said that this is not a political matter at all, it is an attack on the country’s democratic structure, constitutional institutions and freedom of the people. Rahul alleged that no one can do this work except the Prime Minister and the Home Minister.
If this has been done then it is a criminal case. The government has done this to exercise political control and blackmail and influence the democratic process in the country. He said, this is a big step of the Supreme Court. I believe the truth will definitely come out.
This decision is right to expose the lies of selfish elements : BJP
The ruling BJP has described the decision as in line with the stand of the government. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said that the central government has already told the Supreme Court that it would be appropriate that a committee of experts conduct an impartial inquiry into the matter to expose the lies of some vested interests. The court accepted the advice of the Centre.
Patra was asked that the Supreme Court has rejected the formation of the Government Inquiry Committee, he said that it does not matter, because an expert is an expert. Making fun of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, he said that he has a habit of lying.
Government’s ally JDU called the decision historic
JDU, an ally of the central government, has termed the Supreme Court’s decision on Pegasus as historic. The party said that the committee had to be formed due to the lack of clarity on the government’s stand on this important issue. Party general secretary KC Tyagi said, “We have been demanding a probe into the matter from the beginning. Bihar CM Nitish Kumar had suggested a probe to bring out the truth.
