Petitioners say that enforcing the use of Aadhaar is an infringement of privacy
The Supreme Court today pronounced that
individual privacy is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.
The ruling was delivered by a rare
nine-member bench and is based on an array of petitions that challenge the mandatory use of Aadhaar cards which assign a unique 12-digit ID to every citizen. The ruling on the highly contentious issue was to deal with a batch of petitions challenging the Centre's move to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing the benefits of various social welfare schemes. Petitioners say that enforcing the use of Aadhaar is an infringement of privacy.
The government has heralded the Right to privacy verdict saying judgment by a nine-member bench affirms the government's position.
Here are the highlights in the Right to Privacy case:
'Opposed Privacy As Fundamental Right': Mukul Rohatgi Contradicts CentreFormer Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told NDTV that he had argued before the top court against treating privacy as a fundamental right. Mr Rohatgi, who had represented the government in the top court till June this year, said the government had argued before the top court that privacy "is not a fundamental right but a regular common law right".
Government clearly stated that it considers Right To Privacy as fundamental right: Ravi Shankar Prasad to NDTV
BJP chief Amit Shah says Congress engaging in false show of jubilation and vindication over Supreme Court's right to privacy judgement.
Originally when the Constitution was framed, Article 21 says, and it still reads - No person shall be deprived of his life and liberty without procedure established by the law" : Arun Jaitley
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley speaks on Supreme Court verdict on Right to Privacy
Supreme Court judgement on "Fundamental right to privacy" strikes a blow on the unbridled encroachment and surveillance by the state: Sonia Gandhi
Here's her full statement:
In case you missed it, here's the Law Minister's statement on Right to Privacy verdict
When A Son Overruled His Father's JudgementAmong the nine judges who gave Right to privacy verdict today, is one who overruled a past judgement by his father, calling it "seriously flawed".
During the 1975 Emergency, when fundamental rights were suspended by the Indira Gandhi-led Congress government, a five-judge Supreme Court bench backed it. The bench included Justice YV Chandrachud.
Today, overturning that ruling, Justice Chandrachud's son DY Chandrachud, wrote: "The judgements rendered by four judges are flawed. Life and personal liberty are inalienable to human rights. No civilised state can contemplate encroachment on life and personal liberty."
Congress Parliamentarian hails Right to Privacy
Youth Congress welcomes the Right To Privacy Verdict
Welcome Court Ruling But Privacy Not Absolute Right, Says GovernmentThe government welcomes the Supreme Court's judgement on privacy, said union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad today in the first government response to what is seen as a massive setback for it. A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously ruled this morning that individual privacy is a fundamental right; the government had argued in court that the constitution does not guarantee individual privacy as an inalienable fundamental right.
Ravi Shankar Prasad, however, said the government's view is consistent that right to privacy should be fundamental. He said the "essence of today's judgment" validated what Arun Jaitley, then Law Minister, had told Parliament in 2016. "Much before the creation of the nine-judge bench, the government, while moving the Aadhaar Act had clearly acknowledged that Right to Privacy is fundamental, flowing from Article 21," the minister said.
Supreme Court verdict 'progressive', privacy 'a basic right': Soli Sorabjee
Jurists and senior advocates have welcomed the top court's verdict, terming it as "progressive" and "a basic right".
They, however, said the verdict's impact on Aadhaar scheme can be assessed once the full judgement and reasons given by the court are examined.
Lauding the unanimous verdict of the nine-judge bench, senior advocate Soli Sorabjee said it showed the "good approach" of the Supreme Court which does not hesitate in over-ruling its previous judgements. "It is a very progressive judgement and protects the fundamental rights of the people. Privacy is a basic right which is inherent in every individual," the former Attorney General told news agency PTI.
Privacy is an inalienable part of life: P Chidambaram- Congress welcomes SC's unanimous declaration that right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution
- Privacy is at the core of personal liberty, an inalienable part of life
Read Complete Supreme Court Judgement On Privacy Here
The Centre had termed privacy as a "vague and amorphous" right which cannot be granted primacy to deprive poor people of their rights to life, food and shelter.
All fundamental rights come with reasonable restrictions, said noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan
Karnataka High Court judge among petitioners in the case
Karnataka High Court judge Justice K S Puttaswamy, first Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and Magsaysay award recipient Shanta Sinha, feminist researcher Kalyani Sen Menon are among the petitioners in the case. The petitioners have challenged the validity of the Aadhaar scheme on grounds of it being violative of the right to privacy.
The high-voltage hearing saw a battery of senior lawyers, including Attorney General K K Venugopal, Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Arvind Datar, Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subaramaniam, Shyam Divan, Anand Grover, C A Sundaram and Rakesh Dwivedi, advancing arguments either in favour or against the inclusion of right to privacy as a fundamental right
Verdict is major setback for the governmentToday's verdict is a major setback for the government, which had argued that the Constitution does not guarantee individual privacy as an inalienable fundamental right.
The verdict however does not comment on whether the government's demand for Aadhar to be linked to all financial transactions amounts to an infringement of privacy.
That decision will be taken by a separate and smaller bench of the Supreme Court. But experts said that today's ruling could prompt the government to tweak its arguments in that case.
The ruling on the highly contentious issue was to deal with a batch of petitions challenging the Centre's move to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing the benefits of various social welfare schemes.
Chronology of Supreme Court hearings in the right to privacy case:July 7: Three-judge bench says issues arising out of Aadhaar should finally be decided by larger bench and CJI would take a call on need for setting up a constitution bench.
July: Matter mentioned before CJI who sets up a five-judge constitution bench to hear the matter.
July 18: Five-judge constitution bench decides to set up a nine-judge bench to decide whether the right to privacy can be declared a fundamental right under the Constitution. Nine-judge bench (Chief Justice J S Khehar, Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde, R K Agrawal, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Abhay Manohar Sapre, D Y Chandrachud, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and S Abdul Nazeer) constituted to hear the privacy matter.
July 19: SC says right to privacy can't be absolute, may be regulated.
July 19: Centre tells SC that right to privacy is not a fundamental right.
July 26: Karnataka, West Bengal, Punjab and Puducherry, the four non-BJP ruled states move SC in favour of right to privacy.
July 26: Centre tells SC that privacy can be fundamental
right with some riders.
July 27: Maharashtra government tells SC that privacy is not a "standalone" right, but it is rather a concept.
August 1: Supreme Court says there has to be "overarching" guidelines to protect an individual's private information in public domain.
August 2: SC says protection of the concept of privacy in the technological era was a "losing battle", reserves verdict.
August 24: SC declares right to privacy as fundamental right under the Constitution.
Source: PTI
Nine-member bench gave unanimous verdict in the case
The Supreme Court has overruled two earlier verdicts on right to privacy
The nine judges unanimously overruled the two earlier judgements of the apex court that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.
The bench overruled the M P Sharma verdict of 1950 and that of Kharak Singh of 1960.
The judgement in the Kharak Singh case was pronounced by eight judges and in M P Sharma it was delivered by six judges.
Justice Khehar, who read the operative portion of the judgement, said the subsequent verdicts pronounced after M P Sharma and Kharak Singh have laid down the correct position of the law.
Right to privacy is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution: Supreme CourtA nine-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar ruled that right to privacy is protected intrinsically as part of rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Others members of the bench comprising Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde, R K Agrawal, R F Nariman, A M Sapre, D Y Chandrachud, S K Kaul and S Abdul Nazeer also shared the same view.
The Aadhaar database links iris scans and fingerprints to more than a billion people.
Right to privacy will come under right to life and liberty, ruled Supreme Court
The ruling was delivered by a rare nine-member bench and is based on an array of petitions that challenge the mandatory use of Aadhaar cards which assign a unique 12-digit ID to every citizen.
Privacy is protected by Article 21 & Part 3 of Constitution: Supreme Court- Supreme Court has ruled that individual privacy is a fundamental right
- Privacy is protected under Article 21 and Part 3 of Constitution
- Reports also say that the nine-member bench passed an unanimous decision
Meet the 9-judge bench who will decide if privacy is a fundamental right
Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, justices Jasti Chelameswar, SA Bobde, RK Agarwal, Rohinton Nariman, AM Sapre, DY Chandrachud, SK Kaul and S Abdul Nazeer will be pronouncing the verdict in the case.
The Aadhaar database links iris scans and fingerprints to more than a billion people
The Unique Identification Authority of India has said that privacy was not a fundamental right and there were sufficient safeguards to protect data collected from the people - their iris scan and finger prints.
In May, security researchers discovered that the Aadhaar information of as many as 135 million people had leaked online. UIDAI, the agency that governs Aadhaar, has repeatedly said that its data is secure.
There are fears the data could be misused by a government that argues Indians have no right to privacy.
The government says Aadhaar is essential for all services including tax returns, opening bank accounts and securing loans, pensions and cash transfers for those entitled to welfare schemes. It has rejected suggestions that the Aadhaar programme, set up in 2009 by the previous Congress-led government, poses a threat to civil liberties.
Critics argue that although the right to privacy is not explicitly set out in India's constitution, it nevertheless guarantees it implicitly.
The Aadhaar database links iris scans and fingerprints to more than a billion people. The court today will not rule on the reach of Aadhaar - that will be decided separately by a smaller bench, the judges have said.
The petitioners say that enforcing the use of Aadhaar is an infringement of privacy. They also stress that the Aadhaar database was originally presented as a purely voluntary programme that offered to provide every Indian with an identity card.
The government has argued that the Constitution does not guarantee individual privacy as an inalienable fundamental right.
The ruling will be delivered at 10.30 am by a rare nine-member bench and is based on an array of petitions that challenges the mandatory use of Aadhaar cards which assign a unique 12-digit ID to every citizen.