RTI NCPRI files petition in Supreme Court challenging amendments made through Digital Personal Data Protection Act

Related Articles

The Transport Department of the Delhi Government has taken a major step to strictly control pollution and issued a public notice warning

3 hours ago

Kerala High Court – Resignation by an employee must be accepted by the employer subject to the conditions mentioned in the service contract and refusal to do so would amount to bonded labour

4 hours ago

Uttar Pradesh: Amidst the election fever, many big leaders of BSP and Congress are joining Samajwadi Party today, Anees Ahmed Khan and Naseemuddin Siddiqui will join SP in the presence of Akhilesh Yadav.

4 hours ago

The National Campaign for the Right to Information (RTI) (NCPRI) has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the amendments made through the Digital Personal Data Protection Act. The petition states that the changes made to Section 8(1)(j) provide a blanket exemption on the disclosure of personal information, thereby subverting the earlier privacy-transparency balance.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear today a petition alleging that India’s new Digital Personal Data Protection Act is abusing the right to privacy and weakening the right to seek information from the state under the RTI Act.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant will hear the petition filed by human rights and transparency activist Venkatesh Nayak, represented by advocate Vrinda Grover, who has challenged Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act 2023.

The petition states that Section 44(3) of the Right to Information Act, by amending Section 8(1)(j), allows public authorities to explicitly refuse to provide information by stating that the information sought is of a personal nature. It states that this provision subverts the fundamental right to privacy. This right, intended to protect ordinary citizens from state encroachment, has now been extended to protect state and public officials from disclosure of information under the Right to Information Act.

Public Interests Override Privacy
Originally, the provisions of the Right to Information Act exempted authorities from disclosing personal information to an applicant if the information sought was unrelated to a public activity or if disclosing the information would be considered an unwarranted invasion of privacy. However, if public interest outweighed privacy, the government was required to provide the information.

Refusal of Personal Information to the Executive
The petition filed by Vrinda Grover states that the amendment made by the DPDP Act gives the executive unchecked discretion to refuse personal information, which is unconstitutional. This is an unreasonable restriction on the right guaranteed under Article 19 (the right to freedom of expression). Privacy is not a fundamental right guaranteed by the state.

It violates Article 14 (the right to equal treatment) by equating the privacy of public functionaries with that of ordinary citizens. It reverses the privacy jurisprudence regarding the right to information and prioritizes privacy over the broader public interest of transparency and open governance.

The Right to Information has been made misleading.
It argued that the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, when read with the definition of the term “personal data” in the DPDP Act, extends its scope to all information that even remotely relates to the identity of an individual, and renders the Right to Information misleading.