The Role Of ICT In Effective Judicial System

Information and communication technology (ICT) has a crucial role to play in the timely and effective justice dispensation. Online dispute resolution (ODR), e-courts, video conferencing, digital evidencing, sending bail orders and notices through e-mail, knowing online status of cases, online delivery of certified copies of judgments, etc are some of the examples of use of ICT for effective justice delivery.

Successful establishment of e-courts can take care of all the abovementioned aspects of use of technology for effective judicial system. E-courts can take care of issues ranging from filing of cases to the delivery of certified copy of the judgment.

In the Indian context, we are still waiting for the establishment of first e-court of India. Although media reports of establishment of e-courts in India have been surfacing from time to time since 2003 yet as on data we do not have a single e-court in India. Media reports have confused “computerisation” with e-courts as all that has happened in India is computerisation of some traditional aspects of litigation and nothing more.

E-courts require the capability and expertise to provide all litigation services in an online environment. To achieve that purpose we need to have e-courts skills development initiatives in India.

Law Ministry of India must urgently take initiative in this regard as sufficient funds have already been allocated for establishment of e-courts in India and for improving the judicial infrastructure of India.

It has been more than 8 years since it was first declared that e-courts would be established in India. However, lack of expertise has failed this much needed integrated mission mode e-governance project of India. Time has come to give it a dedicated try.

Right To Privacy Bill Of India 2011

Law minister Veerappa Moily is planning to introduce the privacy law of India in the forthcoming monsoon session of the parliament. Till now we have no dedicated statutory privacy law in India. The Supreme Court of India has interpreted right to privacy as a fundamental right under article 21 of the constitution of India.

The need to have a privacy law in India has arises as Indian government has launched many e-surveillance and national security related projects without proper privacy and civil liberties safeguards. Projects like Aadhar, National Intelligence Grid (Natgrid), Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS), National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC), Central Monitoring System (CMS), Centre for Communication Security Research and Monitoring (CCSRM), etc. None of them are governed by any Legal Framework and none of them are under Parliamentary Scrutiny.

Now law ministry is trying to give some minimum privacy safeguards from these projects. The right to privacy bill 2011 of India would provide for such a right to citizens of India and to regulate collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of their personal information. The Bill also contains penal provisions for violation of privacy rights.

The Bill says, “every individual shall have a right to his privacy — confidentiality of communication made to, or, by him — including his personal correspondence, telephone conversations, telegraph messages, postal, electronic mail and other modes of communication; confidentiality of his private or his family life; protection of his honour and good name; protection from search, detention or exposure of lawful communication between and among individuals; privacy from surveillance; confidentiality of his banking and financial transactions, medical and legal information and protection of data relating to individual.”

The bill gives protection from a citizen's identity theft, including criminal identity theft (posing as another person when apprehended for a crime), financial identify theft (using another's identity to obtain credit, goods and services), etc.

The bill prohibits interception of communications except in certain cases with approval of Secretary-level officer. It mandates destruction of interception of the material within two months of discontinuance of interception.

The bill provides for constitution of a Central Communication Interception Review Committee to examine and review the interception orders passed and is empowered to render a finding that such interception contravened Section 5 of the Indian Telegraphs Act and that the intercepted material should be destroyed forthwith. It also prohibits surveillance either by following a person or closed circuit television or other electronic or by any other mode, except in certain cases as per the specified procedure.

As per the bill, no person who has a place of business in India but has data using equipment located in India, shall collect or processor use or disclose any data relating to individual to any person without consent of such individual.

The bill mandates the establishment of a Data Protection Authority of India, whose function is to monitor development in data processing and computer technology; to examine law and to evaluate its effect on data protection and to give recommendations and to receive representations from members of the public on any matter generally affecting data protection.

The Authority can investigate any data security breach and issue orders to safeguard the security interests of affected individuals in the personal data that has or is likely to have been compromised by such breach.

The bill makes contravention of the provisions on interception an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term that may extend up to five years or with fine, which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh or with both for each such interception. Similarly, disclosure of such information is a punishable offence with imprisonment up to three years and a fine of up to Rs. 50,000, or both.

Further, it says any persons who obtain any record of information concerning an individual from any officer of the government or agency under false pretext shall be punishable with a fine of up to Rs. 5 lakh.

For some strange reasons, the law ministry has not made the Bill public. By making the Bill public useful public inputs could have been obtained. Without analysing the copy of the Bill, we cannot comment upon the legality and constitutionality of the same. All we can say at this point of time is that the proposed Bill must protect human rights in cyberspace to be valid and constitutional and it must respect the privacy rights of Indian in the information age.

Is DOT Bound By Policy Decisions Of TRAI?

Department of Telecommunications (DOT) and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) have been locking horns upon many Telecom Related Policy Issues. Of course, on some issues like allowing telemarketing companies to operate freely in India, both DOT and TRAI are concurring. Till now neither DOT nor TRAI has tried to stop Spam Communications in India.

However, there is a “Central Issue” as well that has become bone of contention between DOT and TRAI. The controversy revolves around the role of TRAI in suggesting policy issues.

Although this issue has been agitated by DOT in the past and a favourable reply was given by Law Ministry of India in favour of DOT yet the issue kept on resurfacing again and again. In fact, Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium in his legal opinion had said that DOT can change the terms and conditions of existing licences and the TRAI's recommendations were not binding on the Government.

However, TRAI got its own legal opinion in this regard from former Supreme Court Judge BP Jeevan Reddy and noted Lawyer Harish N Slave. Both were of the opinion that DOT cannot make any modifications to licences of existing mobile phone firms without consulting TRAI. Reddy and Salve had also said the DOT must review the opinion given by Gopal Subramanium.

Now DOT has decided to seek the opinion of Law Ministry once more. DOT would send both set of Opinions to Law Ministry and is expecting the Law Ministry to take a final call in this regard. In the interim period, it has also decided against acting on Gopal Subramanium's opinion.

This is a crucial issue as it would have a very important bearing upon the telecom decisions taken by DOT. For the larger interest of Telecom Sector of India, it is advisable that Law Ministry of India must take a “well informed and highly deliberated decision” in this regard.