86% of people want a law to protect private info: Study

NEW DELHI: For over 55 years, the Supreme Court and the government have not been able to define what should be included under the right to privacy, but citizens seem to have answered the question overwhelmingly, voting in favour of a law to protect individual privacy.

In 1962, the SC in Kharak Singh case had ruled that right to privacy was integral to the right to life. In 1996, in People's Union for Civil Liberties case, the SC held that telephone conversations came under the ambit of privacy but expressed its inability to coin its definition.

A private company, LocalCircle, conducted a survey among 9,653 citizens and asked them if India should have a privacy law to prevent organisations, private or public, from accessing information on individuals without their written authorisation.


A whopping 86% of respondents voted in favour of a law to protect private information. Only 9% said there was no need of a law and the rest offered no comment.

Respondents went on to define what would constitute privacy. The majority, 59% of the sample size, identified 18 issues as confidential, requiring protection of law so as to prevent any private or government organisation from accessing it without consent.

The subjects termed confidential were iris/retina, fingerprint scan and DNA; Aadhaar, PAN, passport, voter ID and date of birth details; details of bank accounts, credit/debit cards, I-T returns and medical records; salary details, performance ratings at work; mobile phone usage details, information about family and residential address.

The survey divided choices of citizens into different categories. A core 10% voted for making only iris/retina, fingerprint scan and DNA information private. Another 4% agreed with the 10% while adding that Aadhaar, PAN, passport, voter ID and date of birth details should be treated as confidential. Three per cent added bank account, credit/debit card, I-T returns and medical records to the privacy basket. Another 42% said salary details, performance ratings at work, mobile phone use details, along with information about family should also be considered confidential.

In 1996, the SC had said, "As a concept, it (privacy) may be too broad and moralistic to define it judicially" and that "we have no hesitation in holding that right to privacy is a part of the right to life and personal liberty enshrined under Article 21. Once the facts in a given case constitute a right to privacy, Article 21 is attracted. The said right cannot be curtailed except according to procedure established by law." It had said what constituted privacy had to be determined by the facts and circumstances of a case.

Despite the apex court rulings in 1962 and 1996, neither the apex court nor the government has ever ventured to enact a law to protect privacy of citizens.