Putting the house in order

The Supreme Court, living up to its credibility of being the custodian of Fundamental Rights, has come out clearly on the Pegasus issue which took the world by storm in August this year. Following the shocking revelation around Pegasus by certain media houses and a non-profit, the Indian Parliament went through continuous disruption on account of the Opposition's attack and government's denial to hold meaningful discussions. Opposition parties, despite their persistent efforts, failed to have any tangible impact around the issue. Since the legislature failed to deliver any meaningful outcome, all eyes were on the judiciary. The Supreme Court's appointment of an independent committee headed by retired Justice RV Raveendran to inquire into the Pegasus matter has served the purpose, and made the demarcation between certain conflicting binary Constitutional aspects quite clear. The major demarcation is between national interest and privacy of citizens. Over the past few years, frequent application of the blanket cover of national security over several matters has led to ambiguity and conflict. In the Pegasus row also the government's refusal to disclose information around the issue came under the same garb. The apex court clarified that "national security cannot be the bugbear that the judiciary shies away from, by virtue of its mere mentioning". The court also rightly pointed out that it cannot remain a 'mute spectator' when the privacy of the citizens of the country is at stake. National security is no doubt a matter of paramount concern. But the government of India is empowered under very stringent legislations like the Official Secrets Act to prevent the disclosure of information that may harm national security. Going by the Constitutional mandate, the matter of national security is duly balanced with the fundamental individual right to privacy. It is, however, important to note that the Pegasus issue is a reflection of a radically new-age disruptive interference that might evade the horizon of existing legal framework. While the executive wing of the government focussed primarily on national security in the context of Pegasus, it was pertinent on the part of the Supreme Court to lay down balancing precedents in favour of privacy. The court has also assured the government that it will not insist on providing information which may be detrimental to the nation's security. So, the Supreme Court observation has basically removed the clutter by putting things in the right order. Furthermore, while the government had earlier insisted on forming its own committee to look into the matter, the apex court denounced such a move by emphasising on judicial review, and constituting an independent committee rather. The apex court has appointed a three-member technical committee comprising Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Dean, National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar; Prabaharan P, Professor at School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kerala; and Ashwin Anil Gumaste, Associate Professor, IIT Bombay. It is learnt that the choice of members has been made considering their proficiency in the field and their political or ideological neutrality. The fact that the committee will be overseen by someone of the stature of RV Raveendran invokes hope. Apart from being on the RM Lodha Committee for reforms in BCCI, Justice Raveendran is known to have played an active role in the domain of human rights during his 6-year stint in the Supreme Court between 2005 and 2011. Another important facet of the Supreme Court ruling on the Pegasus matter that cannot be missed out is regarding the press freedom. The apex court merits applause to have noticed the 'chilling effect' of the prevailing atmosphere in the media industry in India. This also stems from the fact that petitions filed by a bunch of prominent journalists and the Editors Guild of India regarding the possible misuse of Pegasus software have been the enabling factors that led to Supreme Court's intervention in the case. Though coming a bit late, and after a lot of hue and cry, the pathway towards investigation against Pegasus in India is certainly a welcome move. India now joins a bunch of other countries that had promptly initiated the investigation. While the pathway is the correct one, it depends from here how we tread on that. It is hoped that transparency and non-interference will form the hallmark of the inquiry process. Though SC's intervention is highly appreciable and provides a ray of hope, materialising of that hope will depend upon the implementation process.