#RightToPrivacy: Kapil Sibal, AG KK Venugopal make submissions on Day 3 [Read Written Submissions]

The hearing in the case on the Right to Privacy (Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors) resumed today, with Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal and Attorney General KK Venugopal making their submissions..Sibal appeared for the states of Karnataka, West Bengal and Punjab and the Union Territory of Puducherry..After Sibal completed his arguments, AG Venugopal began his submissions for the Central government..Below are excerpts from the submissions made by the two Senior Counsel:.Kapil Sibal.Technology allows State to be all pervasive and invasive. It has the capacity to empower and dis-empower.Issues that arise in the 20th century were not considered by Supreme Court in 1954 and 1962.Today, there is no need to enter someone’s house to know what is going on inside the house. It can be ascertained sitting miles away.MP Sharma and Kharak Singh cannot be used to determine contours of privacy today due to big changes in technology and circumstances.In this era of technology, Right to Privacy cannot be absolute. The Court has to strike a balance and there should be a method to protect communication between State and individuals and non-state parties and individuals.Privacy relates to one’s physical being, thoughts and inter-personal relationships.I only want Your Lordships to decide that there is a Right to Privacy but not its contours.When state accesses data, it should be sanctioned by law and it should be for a legitimate aim.There has to be a data protection law in this country.Privacy also has another dimension – privacy of data of the state. So if a non-state actor accesses such data, he should be prosecuted..Attorney General KK Venugopal.Judgments in MP Sharma and Kharak Singh will not have much force here since this is a 9-judge Bench.Right to Life is a pre-existing right, as can be understood from the wording of Article 21 – “deprived of life or personal liberty”.Concept of deprivation of the Right to Life is also in-built on Article 21 – through a procedure established by law.It took us more than 20 years to lay down that the procedure contemplated under Article 21 should be just and fair, after importing the substantive “due process” concept from United States of America.There are different species of personal liberty. They are all not entitled to the status of a fundamental right automatically.Each of them have to be scrutinised in the context in which it is claimed.Right to Privacy may be a species of right covered by Right to Personal Liberty. But this right has a large number of sub-species and all of them cannot be elevated to the status of fundamental right. Your Lordships have to look into each of them separately.The question is whether Your Lordships will combine a multitude of rights, call it Right to Privacy and elevate it as a fundamental right or will you consider each and every sub-species as and when it comes before this Court?There could be a Fundamental Right to Privacy but it is a wholly qualified right. Since it consists of diverse aspects and is a sub-species of liberty, every aspect of such species will not qualify as a fundamental right..Read the submissions made on Day 1 and Day 2..Read Kapil Sibal’s Written Submissions.Read KK Venugopal’s written submissions here. .Read Central government’s written submissions