SC sets up expert panel to probe Pegasus row

Says state cannot get ‘free pass’ every time national security is raised

BQ:

No omnibus bar against judicial review

National security cannot be the bugbear that the judiciary shies away from, by virtue of its mere mentioning. Although this court should be circumspect in encroaching upon the domain of national security, no omnibus prohibition can be called for against judicial review. — SC Bench

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, October 27

Noting that citizens need to be protected against violation of privacy, the Supreme Court today set up an independent expert committee led by former top court judge RV Raveendran to look into the allegations of snooping on journalists, activists, politicians, etc. using Pegasus spyware.

A Bench led by Chief Justice NV Ramana said Justice Raveendran would be assisted by former IPS officer Alok Joshi and Dr Sundeep Oberoi, Chairman, Sub-Committee (International Organisation of Standardisation/International Electro-Technical Commission/Joint Technical Committee), in overseeing the work of a three-member technical committee.

The members of the technical committee are Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Professor (cyber security and digital forensics) and Dean, National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar; Dr Prabaharan P, Professor (School of Engineering), Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amritapuri, Kerala; and Dr Ashwin Anil Gumaste, Institute Chair Associate Professor (computer science and engineering), IIT, Bombay.

Asking the panel to expeditiously probe the issue and submit a report to it, the Bench posted the matter for hearing after eight weeks.

The court also turned down the Centre’s offer of setting up an expert panel to look into the allegations, saying, “Rather than relying upon any government agencies, we have constituted the committee and shortlisted expert members based on biodatas and information collected independently.”

It also rejected Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s arguement that the petitions and media reports were motivated, saying such omnibus oral submissions can’t be accepted.

“Privacy is not the singular concern of journalists or social activists. Every citizen of India ought to be protected against violations of privacy,” said the Bench, which also included Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli.

Admitting that the scope of judicial review was limited on issues of national security, the Bench said, “However, this does not mean that the state gets a free pass every time the spectre of ‘national security’ is raised. National security cannot be the bugbear that the judiciary shies away from, by virtue of its mere mentioning. Although this Court should be circumspect in encroaching upon the domain of national security, no omnibus prohibition can be called for against judicial review.”

Pointing out that there had been no specific denial of snooping by the Centre, the top court said it had no option but to accept the petitioners’ submissions and appoint an expert committee.

The Bench, which was initially not satisfied with the petitioners’ contentions based on newspaper reports, said they brought on record certain material, including reports of Citizen Lab and affidavits of experts, that can’t be brushed aside.

Noting that there were restrictions on right to privacy, the Bench said the restrictions had to withstand constitutional scrutiny. “In today’s world, restrictions on privacy are to prevent terrorist activities and can only be imposed when needed to protect national security,” it added.