The privacy rights of individuals have been the topic of debate and scrutiny recently, following a controversial order by the Madras High Court. The order mandated the installation of CCTV cameras in spas (massage and therapy centres). Critics have argued that this directive contradicts the Supreme Court’s landmark judgement in the K.S. Puttaswamy case (2017), which prominently addressed individuals’ right to life, personal liberty, and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. This matter has once again raised concerns about privacy rights in India—bringing into discussion key points like inherent values, forms of privacy, restrictions, and government interventions.
The K.S. Puttaswamy Case and the Essence of Right to Privacy
The K.S. Puttaswamy case marked a significant milestone in defining privacy rights in India, declaring that Article 21 implicitly included a right to privacy. It emphasized the inherent and instrumental value of privacy. Inherently, it maintained that privacy is crucial for everyone’s basic dignity. Instrumentally, it held that privacy allows an individual to live life free from unnecessary interferences.
Forms of Privacy: Body, Information, and Choices
Article 21 guarantees several forms of privacy rights. These comprise a person’s right to bodily autonomy, informational privacy, and the freedom to make private choices. There can be no infringement on these aspects without legal justification. For instance, speculation of immoral activities occurring in places like spas cannot justify invasion into an individual’s right to relaxation—a facet of privacy. Any intrusion such as installing CCTV within such premises contradicts a person’s bodily autonomy.
The Doctrine of Separation of Powers
The doctrine of separation of powers helps safeguard the reach of fundamental rights. No judicial measure can curtail these rights. Although it is understood that rights cannot be absolute and are subject to restrictions, such limitations can only come from the legislature or executive powers. The Supreme Court has the reserve power under Article 142 to impose such restrictions.
Supreme Court’s Interpretation of Right to Privacy
The Supreme Court has interpreted privacy as synonymous with the right to be ‘left alone’. In the landmark decision of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India in 2017, the court further elaborated that the right to privacy is protected intrinsically under Article 21 and also as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. It held that the right to privacy is a fundamental constitutional right under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Restrictions on the Right to Privacy
The Supreme Court’s judgement in the K.S. Puttaswamy case clarified that the right to privacy could only be restricted by state action if it passes three tests. Firstly, the state action must have a legislative mandate. Secondly, it must be pursuing a legitimate state purpose. Lastly, the imposition must be proportionate, ensuring the least intrusive action necessary in a democratic society.
The Personal Data Protection Bill 2019
Acknowledging the importance of privacy, the government has presented the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019 in Parliament. This step showcases the government’s commitment to safeguarding citizens’ privacy rights, reinforcing its essential role in upholding the essence of individual liberty and dignity.
