Lawful Interception In India Missing

Lawful interception of Internet, mobile and other technology related communications is a big challenge for Indian government. Indian government is trying to do the same that can best serve its interests. However, in its zest to ensure technology communication interceptions in India, Indian government is landing up in doing “unlawful interceptions”.

The lawful interception law is needed in India and the same is still missing despite contrary governmental claims. Till now, phone tapping in India is not constitutionally performed. The truth is that big brother in India is violating Indian constitution and even courts are silent on this aspect.

Indian government has been taking many steps that are strengthening its e-surveillance and censorship capabilities without meeting the constitutional requirements. For instance, the central monitoring system project of India,  national cyber coordination centre (NCCC) of India, national intelligence grid (Natgrid), national counter terrorism centre (NCTC) of India, Aadhar project of India, etc are all proposed without any legal framework supervising and justifying their functioning.

On the one hand the home ministry is mulling lawful interception law of India and on the other hand it has forced Blackberry messenger service to be an e- surveillance tool in India.  Telenor’s security clearance was blocked by home ministry recently and even the FIPB rejected Telenor’s joint venture proposal as pre mature. 

Civil liberties in India and technological revolution are considered mutually exhaustive in India. Initiatives like surveillance of Internet traffic in India are executed without any procedural safeguards and constitutional rights. E-surveillance in India is presently done with virtually no legal framework. Whatever rules that have been framed in this regard by Indian government, they are clearly violating the constitutional freedoms and rights.

As a matter of fact, civil liberties protection in cyberspace in India have been totally ignored and false claims of national security are raised to suppress civil liberties in India. ICT policies and strategies of India are grossly defective and clearly violating human rights in cyberspace. In fact, there is a dedicated resource titled websites, blogs and news censorship by Google and Indian government that is making a database of various censorship and results manipulation activities in India.

Indian government must ensure civil liberties protection in Indian cyberspace as that is its constitutional as well as human right obligation. Further, parliamentary oversight of intelligence agencies of India is needed. Till now there is no parliamentary scrutiny of the intelligence agencies in India. The sooner these initiatives would be taken the better it would be for the larger interest of India.

Cell Phone Laws In India

Legal enablement of ICT systems in India is posing big challenge before India. Cell phone laws in India are just one of the examples of such legal enablement. Although we have a cyber law for India yet we have no dedicated mobile phone law and mobile phone laws in India are needed. Similarly, efforts must also be made to strengthen the mobile cyber security in India.

With the launch of projects like central monitoring system (CMS), national cyber coordination centre (NCCC) of India, etc the requirements to have valid e-surveillance and cell phone laws are imminent.

Cell phone or mobile phone laws in India have still to evolve. Presently provisions pertaining to cell phones are scattered under various statues and governmental guidelines and rules. However, we have no dedicated cell phone laws in India.

Cell phones are playing important role in day to day activities of Indians. They are used for multiple purposes that cover both personal and commercial transactions. We cannot ignore the commercial, contractual and legal significance and consequences of cell phone transactions in India. This necessities enactment of dedicated cell phone laws in India.

However, positive developments in this direction are not happening in India. On the contrary, negative development infringing civil liberties in cyberspace are taking place in India. Human rights protection in cyberspace cannot be ignored the way Indian government is doing presently.

For instance, the proposal to allow department of telecommunication (DoT) to monitor cell phone locations in India is one such controversial issue. Big brother must not overstep its limits in India. Even proposed cell site based e-surveillance in India has crossed this limit well beyond those permitted by Indian Constitution.

We must have well defined procedure and cell site data location laws in India. As we have no dedicated privacy laws, data protection laws, data security laws, anti telemarketing laws, anti spam laws, etc, cell phones monitoring in India is not legally sustainable.

Even the proposed central monitoring system (CMS) project of India is not legitimate and legally sustainable as there is no legal framework that justifies its operation in India. Currently there is no phone tapping law in India that is constitutionally sound and we urgently need a lawful interception law in India. Similarly, the colonial phone tapping laws of India must be repealed and new and constitutionally sound phone tapping laws in India must be formulated.

DoT is excessively favouring e-surveillance in India and surveillance of Internet traffic in India. We need a legally valid e-surveillance policy of India to address these issues. Internet censorship in India has greatly increased and now the intelligence agencies of India want to ensure monitoring of cell phone usages in India as well. This is troublesome as parliamentary oversight of intelligence agencies of India is missing and this clearly violated the constitutional safeguards.

It is high time that Indian government must enact constitutionally sound cell phone laws in India so that civil liberties and law enforcement requirements can be reconciled.

Mobile Phone Laws In India Needed

In this column, Mr. B.S.Dalal, Partner of India’s exclusive techno legal ICT law firm Perry4Law, has shared his views about the requirements of enacting mobile phone laws in India.

We have no dedicated cell phone laws in India. Further, we do not have a robust mobile cyber security in India. In this background, absence of a dedicated mobile phone law in India is not a good sign.

Mobile phones are increasingly being used for multi purpose in India. However, legal framework for mobile phones in India is still missing. Some provisions can be made applicable to mobiles in India through the information technology act 2000 (IT Act 2000) but we still do not have a dedicated mobile phone laws in India.

The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) has proposed a new national telecom policy of India 2011 that would be operational very soon. The new telecom policies as well as other projects of Indian government and DoT are excessively favouring e-surveillance in India and surveillance of Internet traffic in India. We need a legally valid e-surveillance policy of India to address these issues. Otherwise, it would violate human rights protection in cyberspace.

The proposal to allow DoT to monitor cell phone locations in India is also a controversial issue. Big brother must not overstep its limits in India. The proposed cell site based e-surveillance in India has crossed this limit well beyond those permitted by Indian Constitution.

We must have well defined procedure and cell site data location laws in India. As we have no dedicated privacy laws, data protection laws, data security laws, anti telemarketing laws, anti spam laws, etc, mobile phones monitoring in India is not legally sustainable.

Even the proposed central monitoring system (CMS) project of India is not legitimate and legally sustainable as there is no legal framework that justifies its operation in India. Currently there is no phone tapping law in India that is constitutionally sound and we urgently need a lawful interception law in India. Similarly, the colonial phone tapping laws of India must be repealed and new and constitutionally sound phone tapping laws in India must be formulated.

The mobile phone laws of India must cover all these issues that are presently left unaddressed. In the absence of such laws, mobile phone data analysis, mobile phone location tracking, mobile phone tapping in India, etc are illegal and unconstitutional.

Phone Tapping Law In India

Phone tapping laws in India is in real bad shape. Rather, it cannot be properly termed as a valid and constitutional phone tapping law. The Indian telegraph act 1885 carries few provisions under which the Indian government and its agencies can tap phones in India.

However, these provisions and outdated law are clearly in violation of constitutional provisions and constitutional safeguards. As on date, we have no constitutionally sound lawful interception and phone tapping law in India. Even the proposed the central monitoring system project of India (CMS Project of India) is also not supported by any legal framework.

As on date, phone tapping in India is not performed constitutionally and this unconstitutional phone tapping in India is a “constitutional failure of India”. Constitutional phone tapping law in India is urgently needed to be formulated so that this illegality and unconstitutionality can be cured.

Instead of bringing suitable laws to curtail illegal and unconstitutional phone tapping and e-surveillance in India, Indian government is doing the exact opposite. Big brother in India is overstepping the constitutional limits. Not only the phone tapping has been increased in India by both governmental and private players but even surveillance of Internet traffic in India and Internet censorship in India has been increased.

Now it has been reported that very soon the Centre would have direct access to the telephone conversations of Indian citizens and organisations as the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has developed capabilities to intercept phones without phone operator’s assistance. At present the central monitoring system (CMS) is at trial stage where Delhi and Haryana regions would be covered by establishing the main server in New Delhi. It would take another 12 months before the system is officially operational.

With this we may have two separate telephone tapping systems in India. The first is managed by the Home Ministry of India and now the DoT would have its own telephone tapping system at place. The DoT would be required to set up separate servers in each State, depending upon the requirements and the number of subscribers. While the facility in Delhi and adjoining States are likely to be ready by year-end, it might take at least another couple of years before servers are established across India.

An interesting functionality of the CMS is that irrespective of operators, lines would be tapped at one centralised location, which will be manned round-the-clock by officials of the government agencies.

While this may help in proper law and order enforcement yet the misuse of this facility is very much possible. This is more so when there is neither a legal framework nor constitutional safeguards to prevent abuse of CMS in India. It would be appropriate if a constitutional lawful interception law is formulated in India immediately.

Abuse Of State Secrecy And National Security: Obstacles To Parliamentary And Judicial Scrutiny Of Human Rights Violations

The Council of Europe has issued many important and far reaching resolutions and notifications in the year 2011. One such important resolution is titled as abuse of state secrecy and national security: obstacles to parliamentary and judicial scrutiny of human rights violations. This is in addition to the concerns shown by the European Council regarding cyber attacks and political pressures upon cyber dissidents. It seems European Council is stressing upon protecting human rights in cyberspace and civil liberties protection in cyberspace.

This also shows that the international community is getting serious about protection of civil liberties in cyberspace. For instance, the connection between United Nations and human rights in cyberspace is also well known where UN declared that access to Internet is a basic human right. However, the efforts of United Nations regarding cyber laws and human rights in cyberspace need to be further expedited as they are slow in nature.

As far as India is concerned the situation is really alarming. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies of India are practically working with no legal framework. Parliamentary scrutiny of law enforcement and intelligence agencies of India is still missing. Although draft bills for central bureau of investigation (CBI) and intelligence agencies of India were made, they were never considered by Indian parliament. Till now agencies like CBI, research and analysis wing (RAW), etc are working with no constitutionally sound law governing their operations.

Further, numerous e-surveillance oriented projects like Aadhar, national intelligence grid (Natgrid), central monitoring system (CMS), national counter terrorism centre (NCTC), crime and criminals tracking and networks system (CCTNS), etc have been launched without any legal framework and parliamentary scrutiny. Phone tapping in India is also not done in a constitutional manner. E-surveillance in India and Internet censorship in India has also increased a lot. Clearly, parliament has failed to address abuses of state secrecy and national security powers in India.

Even judicial scrutiny of e-surveillance and Internet censorship issues in India is not up to the mark. Fortunately, the Supreme Court of India is dealing with privacy violations through illegal phone tapping in India. While doing so the Supreme Court has observed that with the present state of technology used in India by law enforcement agencies and private individuals, privacy rights of Indians are at grave risk. The Supreme Court also recommended reformation of official secrets act of India keeping in mind the contemporary requirements and environment. This is a good sign but the Supreme Court of India must expedite these matters as they have been pending for long.

Parliamentary oversight and judicial scrutiny are the twin safeguards that can prevent excessive abuse of state secrecy and national security powers in India. Unfortunately, presently both of them are missing and this has resulted in an intelligence mess in India. Further, India is desperate to control technology rather utilising it.

We need dedicated and separate privacy laws, data privacy laws and data protection laws in India to tackle state abuse of its sovereign powers. The sooner these procedural and constitutional safeguards are adopted in India the better it would be for the larger interest of India.

Indian Research And Analysis Wing (RAW) Granted E-Surveillance Powers

Indian government is in controversies these days. Controversial functions like e-surveillance in India, websites blocking in India, Internet censorship in India, etc are performed by Indian government and its agencies without any procedural and constitutional safeguards and without any constitutionally sound legal framework supporting these functions.

India does not have a constitutionally sound lawful interception law. Phone tapping in India is still done in an unconstitutional manner and at times by private individuals as well. Further surveillance of Internet traffic in India is now openly acknowledged by Indian government.

Recently Internet intermediaries in India were asked to pre screen contents before they are posted on their platforms by the account holders. Before that Yahoo took Indian government to court over e-surveillance. In its petition, Yahoo has raised questions on the right to privacy of a company that stores such sensitive data and to what extent authorities can coerce it to part with the information considered necessary to either track terror perpetrators or thwart future attacks.

The intelligence infrastructure of India has become synonymous for non accountability and mess. There is neither any parliamentary oversight nor and transparency and accountability of the working of Intelligence Agencies of India. Intelligence infrastructure of India needs rejuvenation keeping in mind the constitutional obligations. As on date, intelligence gathering in India is performed unconstitutionally.

Among all these controversial issues, now the Ministry of Home Affairs has added and notified the intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in the list of eight agencies to intercept phone calls, e-mails and data communications. This would give RAW a cover for intercepting phone calls, e-mails and voice and data communication domestically.

RAW would not be able to deploy its communication interception equipment at international gateways to snoop on all forms of data, be it international telephony emanating from India, or any form of electronic data including e-mails. However, this notification has failed to mention how such interceptions would be in conformity with civil liberties protection in Indian cyberspace.

Intelligence Gathering In India Is Unconstitutional

Intelligence gathering and fighting terrorism are essential national security and sovereign functions. They cannot be equated at par with other governmental functions. That is the reason why every country provides some extra protection and immunity from public scrutiny to such functions.

None can doubt that Indian counter terrorism capabilities need rejuvenation. We have an obvious but unresolvable terrorism dilemma in India. With the growing use of social media by cyber criminals and terrorists, the intelligence agencies world over are engaging in open source intelligence through these social media and platforms.

However, the real problem is that in India intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies are practically governed by no law. Whether it is Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or Intelligence Agencies of India, none of them are presently “accountable” to Parliament of India.

Even the constitutional validity of national investigation agency act, 2008 is still doubtful. Further, India does not have a constitutionally sound lawful interception law. Phone tapping in India is still done in an unconstitutional manner and at times by private individuals as well.

E-surveillance in India, websites blocking in India, Internet censorship in India, etc are also not done a strictly constitutional manner. Till now Indian courts have not tested the acts of intelligence agencies of India on the touchstone of constitutional protections. There is no e-surveillance policy in India and protection of human rights in Indian cyberspace has still not been considered by Indian government.

In fact, intelligence infrastructure of India has become synonymous for non accountability and mess. There is neither any parliamentary oversight nor and transparency and accountability of the working of Intelligence Agencies of India. Intelligence infrastructure of India needs rejuvenation keeping in mind the constitutional obligations.

A private Bill titled Intelligence Services (Powers and Regulation) Bill, 2011 was circulated in the last session of the Parliament. However, instead of discussing the same in the current Monsoon Session (August 2011) and winter session (December 2011) of the Parliament, Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has announced that Law on Intelligence Agencies would be formulated soon.

The national intelligence grid (Natgrid) project of India is also without any constitutional safeguards. The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) has also given only “Partial In Principle Approval” to NATGRID Project. Since NATGRID Project is not supported by any Legal Framework and Parliamentary Oversight, the “Crucial Stages” of NATGRID Project has not yet been approved by the CCS. Thus, NATGRID Project of India is still in troubled waters as lack of Privacy Laws and Data Protection Laws has put it in doldrums.

On top of it we have the proposed central monitoring system (CMS) project of India that has been proposed without any parliamentary oversight. Further, stress upon Internet kill switch is also given by India without realising that Internet kill switch is not a solution to cyber threats. Anti Internet kill switch measures are needed to prevent Indian government from taking recourse of any such unconstitutional and draconian action.

Finally, intelligence gathering skills developments in India are far from satisfactory. Intelligence agencies of India are insisting upon use of 40 bits encryption level in India. This has been suggested so that surveillance of Internet traffic in India is possible. However, e-surveillance is not a substitute for cyber skills. Encryption policy of India is urgently needed to resolve all these issues.

Presently, Indian government and intelligence agencies of India are engaging in many unconstitutional activities that are not subject to any parliamentary or judicial scrutiny. It is high time to bring some order in the chaos created by this situation unless it is too late.

Cyber Law On Social Media And Networking Sites In India

Social media and networking sites have a crucial role to play. Now even governments across the world acknowledge this importance of social media websites. India is one such country that is currently trying to deal with social media sites. However, we have no dedicated social media laws in India. It has even been reported that guidelines for social media contents monitoring in India would be issued very soon.

However, till now we have no social media policy in India. Even we do not have dedicated social networking laws in India that can take care of the misuses of social platforms. However, the framework and guidelines for use of social media for government organisations has been recently suggested by department of information technology. Theses guidelines provide an Indian social media framework for governmental departments and organisations that employees of these organisations must follow.

Social media is considered to be an Internet intermediary as per Indian cyber law. The recent controversy of Internet censorship in India has once again reiterated the importance of effective social media laws in India.

Cyber law due diligence in India has become very stringent. This applies to various fields and to multiple stakeholders. For instance, cyber due diligence for banks in India is now a well known requirement for banks in India. However, Internet intermediaries are the most widely covered stakeholders in this regard. Intermediaries liability for cyber law due diligence in India is really tough.

Indian government is very keen in regulating the contents of social media in a constructive manner. This occasionally results in censorship of Internet in India. Further, Indian government is now openly acknowledging surveillance of Internet traffic in India.

Recently Internet intermediaries in India have been asked to pre screen contents before they are posted on their websites. India wants companies like Google and Facebook to censor users’ contents before they are posted.

In a related incidence, Yahoo has filed a petition raising the questions regarding the right to privacy of a company that stores sensitive data of its customers and users and to what extent authorities can coerce it to part with the information considered necessary to either track terror perpetrators or thwart future attacks. The Google’s outcry for lack of Internet intermediary law in India is another example of growing dissatisfaction towards Indian cyber laws, especially Internet intermediary laws of India.

However, social media sites have certain techno legal obligations and liabilities as per Indian laws. For instance, social networking sites are liable for online IPRs violations, including online copyright violations in India. Although we have no law on the lines of online copyright infringement liability limitation Act (OCILLA) of United States yet the “safe harbour” provisions protecting intermediaries are not available under certain conditions as per Indian laws. Social networking sites must be aware of these limitations while operating in India. However, if social media sites are working within the framework of Indian laws, unreasonable e-surveillance, Internet censorship and websites blocking should not be by Indian government.

The corporate environment of India is changing rapidly as per global; requirements. Corporate laws in India are proposed to be streamlined with the introduction of the proposed Companies Bill 2011. The foreign direct investment (FDI) in India has been liberalised in many sectors. Even FDI in pharmaceuticals sector in India has been liberalised. Securities and Exchange Control Board (SEBI) has also proposed an electronic Initial public offer in India (E-IPO in India). These steps are pointing towards and open and transparent governmental functioning and not e-surveillance and Internet censorship oriented model.

Internet censorship in India can create problems for not only FDI in India but also for the growth of various sectors including banking sector of India. An integrated modern banking law for India is already in pipeline and an e-surveillance model of India would not be beneficial for the same.

Perry4Law and Perry4Law Techno Legal Base (PTLB) strongly recommend that Indian government must enact strong and effective social media laws, e-governance laws and e-commerce laws in India. Social networking laws in India must be so drafted as would benefit all the stakeholders.

Internet Censorship In India

Internet in India is under potential threat of censorship and e-surveillance. Internet censorship in India has increased a lot. Similarly, e-surveillance in India has also increased to intolerable limits.

India has a draconian but cyber criminals’ friendly cyber law in the form of information technology act, 2000 (IT Act 2000). It was amended in 2008 to confer unregulated e-surveillance, Internet censorship and website blocking powers to Indian government and its agencies. The present cyber law of India is an unconstitutional one in the absence of procedural safeguards that can prevent these abusive draconian powers under the IT Act 2000. It requires an urgent repeal.

On top of it we have the proposed central monitoring system (CMS) project of India that has been proposed without any parliamentary oversight. Further, stress upon Internet kill switch is also given by India without realising that Internet kill switch is not a solution to cyber threats. Anti Internet kill switch measures are needed to prevent Indian government from taking recourse of any such unconstitutional and draconian action.

Website blocking and Internet censorship should be resisted as far as possible in India. This fight should be techno legal in nature where both technical and legal measures must be adopted to thwart surveillance and censorship activities of Indian government and its agencies. Proactive self defence in cyberspace is needed not only against alien enemies but also against our own Orwellian government.

Self defence in cyberspace is a concept whose time has come at both national and international level. At the national level of India self defence is required not only against cyber criminals but also against our own over zealous and e-surveillance oriented Indian government. Suggestions have been given in the past that United Nations (UN) must protect human rights in cyberspace as well. However, UN is not serious about protecting human rights in cyberspace.

At the national level, Indian government acquired itself unregulated, illegal and unconstitutional e-surveillance, Internet censorship and website blocking powers with no procedural safeguards. The information technology act, 2000 (IT Act 2000) was amended through the information technology amendment act 2008 (IT Act 2008) and this amendment gave unconstitutional and illegal powers to Indian government and its agencies. With the notification of the IT Act, 2008, the journey from welfare state to a police state was completed for India.

Instances of website blocking in India and Internet censorship in India have increased a lot. What is more worrisome is the fact that e-surveillance and Internet censorship in India have increased without any lawful interception law in India. Lawful interception law in India is missing and phone tapping in India is done in an unconstitutional manner.

Of all e-surveillance project, nothing is worst than the Aadhar project of India and its implementing unique identification authority of India (UIDAI) headed by Nandan Nilekani. Irrespective of what Nandan Nilekani and Indian government says, Aadhar project and UIDAI are serving a very vicious, evil and nefarious objective of e-surveillance without procedural safeguards. Surprisingly, even Google is censoring results pertaining to Aadhar project and UIDAI and is messing up with search placement results.

Now Internet intermediaries in India have been asked to pre screen contents before they are posted on their platforms by the account holders. India wants companies like Google and Facebook to censor users’ contents. In fact, Goggle web censorship has greatly increased in the past. Perhaps somebody at Google was already doing the pre screening of some web contents in India, with or without knowledge of Google.

Google has been in controversies from time to time. Whether it is illegal data gathering, censorship of Google news searches, manipulation of search results, etc, Google has been doing it all. In fact, it seems Google was actively helping Indian government and its agencies for messing up with Aadhar project, UIDAI, World Bank or any other similar post that questions the wrong practices of Indian government. During that period Google continued its censorship drive in India and many posts failed to appear in news, blogs and search segments.

What Internet intermediaries are facing now is a direct result of their succumbing to Indian government pressure and unconstitutional laws like IT Act 2008. They should have challenged the constitutional validity of IT Act 2008 that is the root cause of all these troubles. Fortunately Yahoo took Indian government to court over e-surveillance and more such litigations are expected in the near future. Let us see how cyber law of India would develop in this regard.

Surveillance of Internet Traffic In India

E-surveillance in India is no more a secret as Indian government is openly engaging in e-surveillance activities. This is despite the fact that an unregulated and unguided e-surveillance is violating the civil liberties protection in cyberspace in India.

Now e-surveillance is proposed to be expanded to even mobile infrastructure. The cell site location based e-surveillance in India is also in contemplation. Cell site data location laws in India and privacy issues are once again bypassed for this proposal. Even the e-surveillance policy of India is missing that can provide some safeguards against illegal and unconstitutional e-surveillance in India.

Similarly projects like Aadhar project of India, central monitoring system project of India, etc are also intended to strengthen the e-surveillance capabilities of India without and constitutional safeguards.

On the top of India, India is trying every possible method to discourage the cyber security initiatives like encryption. Encryption policy of India is missing and so are encryption laws in India.

Now Indian government has forced the telecom service providers and internet service providers (ISPs) to deploy monitoring equipment for surveillance of internet traffic as per the conditions of the respective license agreements and as per the requirements of security agencies. At present, indigenous internet monitoring systems are being deployed in the network of ISPs.

Based on the feedback and traffic projections provided by the ISPs, the internet monitoring systems are upgraded and deployed continuously as per the requirement of security agencies.

India needs to upgrade its intelligence infrastructure that is in real mess. Intelligence agencies need to develop intelligence gathering and analysis skills so that situations like the present one can be taken care of. E-surveillance is not a substitute for cyber skills and Indian government and its agencies must realise this truth as soon as possible.

Even by forcing the telecom service providers and ISPs to filter internet traffic at large would not serve any purpose. Cyber criminals and terrorists are already well aware to use sophisticated technology to hide their tracks. This exercise would only violate the civil liberties of law abiding citizens.

Fortunately, Yahoo has dragged Indian government regarding e-surveillance to the Delhi High Court and a judicial scrutiny of e-surveillance in India may be possible. Time has come to consider all these aspects in detail and at the highest levels by the Indian government and parliament of India.

Yahoo Took Indian Government To Court Over E-Surveillance

E-surveillance in India has become a big nuisance for intermediaries like internet service providers (ISPs), e-commerce sites, search engines, e-mail providers, etc. The liability of Internet intermediaries for copyright violations is also well known that has further increased the troubles of intermediaries in India.

Intermediaries liability for cyber law due diligence in India has become very stringent after the information technology amendment act 2008 has been notified. Information technology act 2000 (IT Act 2000) now carries many e-surveillance, websites blocking and Internet censorship provisions.

The problem is that there are “no procedural safeguards” subject to which these wide and sweeping powers can be exercised. This is also the reason why these provisions are unconstitutional and illegal as they are violating the provisions of Indian constitution.

However, in the larger interests of their commercial activites in India, these intermediaries not only accepted the draconian amendments in the cyber law of India but they are also complying with the legal as well as illegal orders of Indian government and its agencies. However, this approach would be counter productive for them in the long run and they must come forward against such laws and draconian provisions.

Yahoo has taken a very significant step in this regard. Yahoo has approached the Delhi High Court against the Union home ministry's attempts to obtain information about nearly a dozen Yahoo IDs/IP addresses it suspects are used by Islamic terrorists and Maoists.

Yahoo has challenged the legality of the government's decision to penalise it by slapping it with a fine of Rs 11 lakh because Yahoo refused to share profile details of the users of these email ID's that are under the scanner of the agencies. Recently, the HC stayed the imposition of the fine, and sought a response from the Centre.

In its petition, Yahoo has raised questions on the right to privacy of a company that stores such sensitive data and to what extent authorities can coerce it to part with the information considered necessary to either track terror perpetrators or thwart future attacks. "The government cannot under the cloak of national security implications bypass legal procedures," the petitioner has argued, claiming the section and clauses invoked by the Union ministry to demand information from Yahoo doesn't empower the government to do so.

Yahoo has taken a bold step that even companies like Google have not been able to do so. The matter is pending before the Delhi high court that has a good chance to bring some order in the otherwise chaosed e-surveillance world of India. The issue of phone tapping and privacy violations in India is also pending before the Supreme Court of India.

The matter must also be looked from another angle. Human rights protections in cyberspace in India are not safeguarded at all. Even at the international level United Nations has not shown much interest in protecting civil liberties in cyberspace. The data privacy laws in India are also missing. In short, there is complete negation of human rights in cyberspace in the Indian context.

Yahoo’s case may bring to the knowledge of Indian courts this situation and we may expect some respect for the constitutional rights and freedoms that are seldom respected in India these days.

Jeff Radebe Denies Regulation Of Blackberry’s Messenger Services In South Africa

Research in Motion’s (RIM) Blackberry Service is under fire and facing E-Surveillance Regulations in various Nations. Of course, this is a “gross lack of understanding” of Technology and a “futile exercise” to control the same.

India is one such Nations that believe that E-Surveillance is better than and a substitute of Cyber Security. India seems to be a country that believes that an Internet Kill Switch can be a solution to Cyber Threats. As a result it forced Blackberry to provide a framework that would allow Indian Intelligence Agencies to monitor contents on its Messenger Service. Thus, Blackberry’s Messenger Service is now an E-Surveillance tool in India.

However, we have seen “positive developments” as well. For instance, United Nations has declared that Right to Internet Connection a Human Right. Similarly, recently the Council of Europe’s drafted a Resolution on abuse of State Secrecy and National Security respecting the Civil Liberties. The latest to add to this list is the declaration by South Africa’s Justice Minister Jeff Radebe that South Africa has no plans to regulate Blackberry's encrypted message service BBM for the Cyber Security.

Jeff Radebe said that there were no plans at this stage to regulate the BBM service of Blackberry. His statement came after the Deputy Minister of Communication Obed Bapela recently called for such regulation.

"I have been assigned the portfolio of cyber-security and wish to invite specialists to assist us to determine whether we should regulate applications such as BBM within the context of cyber security," Bapela had said earlier.

The use of BBM in civil unrest in recent weeks in South Africa had raised fears that it could give rise to situations such as that experienced in Arab states.

With countries such as India and Saudi Arabia also recently having proposed regulation for the Blackberry service, legal experts here expressed concern about Bopela's suggestion. However, not only Bopela's viewpoint is right but also ideal as he is inviting the Cyber Security Experts to deliberate upon security related problem that Countries like India and Arab States never do.

Cyber Security problems can be solved only through a “Techno Legal Regime” and not through E-Surveillance and “Oppressive Methods” that India and Arab States are doing. India needs to develop Intelligence Gathering Skills and Cyber Skills to solve it s Cyber Security and National Security related problems.

Microsoft And Skype Are Playing Lawful Interception Card

World over Lawful Interception Laws are cited as the reason for E-Surveillance and Eavesdropping. However, almost all of these so called Lawful Interception Laws are themselves “Unconstitutional”.

Take the example of Indian Cyber Law the Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act 2000) that carries many draconian E-Surveillance provisions without any “Procedural Safeguards”. These provisions and laws are pressed to further the causes of e-surveillance and eavesdropping.

Research in Motion’s (RIM) Blackberry has already allowed a backdoor entry to Indian Intelligence Agencies for its cloud based Messenger Services. Now it has been reported that Skype and Microsoft have build a backdoor into the VOIP application. It is called Lawful Interception and is part of a new patent which Microsoft filed back in 2009, but is now preparing to unleash itself into our world due to its recent approval.

The US law set by CALEA (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) states that all telecommunications operators must enable their hardware and software for surveillance tracking. What is hard to understand is why Microsoft is so willing to open up its software for backdoor exploits. This creates a situation which welcomes exploits and willingly turns your computer into a revolving door for hackers.

While following a Law is not per se wrong but following an “Unconstitutional Law” is definitely wrong. Similarly following a Constitutional Law is the “Duty” of all people but following draconian, Unconstitutional and Inhumane Laws is definitely not required.

Let see who would win the battle between E-Surveillance and Human Rights Protection in Cyberspace. However, with the growing e-surveillance and eavesdropping, Self Defence Measures in Cyberspace would definitely increase in future.

Cyber Laws All Over The World Are Becoming Unreasonable And Oppressive

Cyber Laws all over the World are intentionally designed to violate civil rights like privacy, speech and expression, etc. They are also intentionally formulated to facilitate “Internet Censorship” and “E-Surveillance” beyond the legitimate limits of “National Security”. This approach is more dangerous and is detrimental to the national security in the long run.

The Google’s episode regarding China’s censorship shows the growing hunger of various nations for Internet censorship and e-surveillance. India is no different from China when it comes to “Internet Censorship” and “E-Surveillance”, though the extent and degree may be somewhat lesser. The Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act 2000) is the sole cyber law of India that was amended by the Information Technology Act 2008 (IT Act 2008). From here starts the real problem.

According to Praveen Dalal, Managing Partner of Perry4Law and the leading Techno-Legal Expert of India, “The IT Act 2008 made India a “Safe Heaven” for cyber criminals on the one hand and an “Endemic E-Surveillance Society” and “Internet Censorship State” on the other hand. It seems the main aim of the proposed IT Act 2008 was to strengthen the “Internet Censorship” and “E-Surveillance Capabilities” of India.

With the passage of IT Act 2008 India has now officially become an endemic e-surveillance society. The amendments have provided unregulated, unconstitutional and arbitrary e-surveillance and Internet censorship powers to Government of India and its agencies and instrumentalities, says Praveen Dalal. The fact is that India has become an E-Police State, states the ICT Trends of India 2009.

Surprisingly, Minister of State for Communication Sachin Pilot believes that Indian cyber law is strong enough to meet the challenges posed by technology-assisted terrorism and cyber-terrorism. It seems he has not gone through the present IT Act 2000 after its 2008 amendments.

Some observers in India have rejoiced the exit of Google from China believing that it may be a good opportunity for India. However, they fail to understand the “ground reality” that India is no different from China when it comes to Internet Censorship and E-Surveillance. If India does not abdicate its alliance to Internet censorship and e-surveillance similar incidence may happen in India as well.

SOURCE: ITVOIR