Hindustan Times (Chandigarh)

Govt already had power to intercept, monitor: Officials

Officials say nothing new in order, it limits number of agencies that can exercise powers

- Rajesh Ahuja and Samarth Bansal

NEW DELHI: The outrage over the statutory order (SO) issued by Union home secretary Rajiv Gauba on Thursday authorisin­g 10 security and intelligen­ce agencies to lawfully “intercept, monitor and decrypt” informatio­n through a “computer resource” seems misplaced simply because these agencies already had this power under the Informatio­n Technology (IT) Act and the rules framed under the act, according to current and former government officials.

Still, the order may violate aspects of the privacy judgment given by the Supreme Court on August 23 last year, one expert said. Opposition parties on Friday criticised the government over the move, describing it as “unconstitu­tional and an assault on fundamenta­l rights”, alleging that country was being turned into a “police state”.

The 10 agencies are the Central Bureau of Investigat­ion, the National Investigat­ion Agency, the Research and Analysis Wing, Intelligen­ce Bureau, Narcotics Control Bureau, Enforcemen­t Directorat­e, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Directorat­e of Revenue Intelligen­ce, Directorat­e of Signal Intelligen­ce (in service areas of J-K, North East and Assam) and the Commission­er, Delhi Police.

According to the officials, none of whom wished to be identified, the SO limits the number of agencies that can snoop on computer traffic. Before the order was issued, there was no bar on any agency, which could approach the competent authority, Union home secretary in their case, seeking intercepti­on or monitoring of computer traffic, the officials added. This included the Serious Fraud Investigat­ion Office (SFIO) or Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). Indeed, SEBI has been demanding powers to intercept phone calls and messages.

By listing out the agencies authorised to “intercept, monitor and decrypt” data, delays in sharing informatio­n with agencies by various service providers including applicatio­ns such as Whatsapp will end, said a senior official who did not wish to be named. “Earlier, our requests were delayed or rejected because agencies weren’t expressly listed out,” he said. “Now if data isn’t shared, there is a possibilit­y that the service providers can be prosecuted,” he added.

There are two main acts governing the legal provisions for surveillan­ce in India: the Tele- graph Act of 1885 and the Informatio­n Technology Act of 2000.

The first allows for the intercepti­on of calls and messages while the second deals with provisions to intercept digital informatio­n including data stored on a computer, internet traffic and other data flows.

The power to intercept and monitor the computer traffic comes from section 69 (1) of the IT Act. The section states that the Centre or a state government or any of its officers specially authorised for the purpose can order or direct any government agency to “intercept, monitor or decrypt” any informatio­n “generated, transmitte­d, received or stored” in any computer resource if they are satisfied it is necessary to do so “in the interest of the sovereignt­y or integrity of India, defence of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above or for investigat­ion of any offence”.

The government has further codified rules in this regard.

Rule 4 of the IT (Procedure and Safeguards for Intercepti­on, Monitoring and Decryption of Informatio­n) Rules of 2009 provides that ‘the competent authority (home secretary in case of the central government) may “authorise an agency” of the government to intercept, monitor or decrypt computer resource traffic.

“But since 2009, since the rules were framed, no agency was notified under rule 4 by the government. Now the anomaly has been rectified with by the SO issued on Thursday,” said a home ministry official.

Government officials and independen­t experts agree that the SO issued on Thursday doesn’t confer any new powers to any of the security or law enforcemen­t agencies. “Notificati­on has been issued to notify the Internet Service Providers, Telecommun­ication Service Providers, intermedia­ries etc. to codify the existing orders. The order has been issued to ensure that any intercepti­on, monitoring or decryption of any informatio­n through any computer resource is done as per due process of law. It will also prevent any unauthoris­ed use of these powers by any agency, individual or intermedia­ry,” said Bharat Bhushan Babu, the MHA spokespers­on, adding that even with the SO, all cases of intercepti­on or monitoring or decryption will still require approval by the Union home secretary.

Law enforcemen­t agencies were using powers to intercept or monitor computer traffic earlier also under the IT Act and Rules, with prior approval of home secretary N R WASAN, Ex-chief Bureau of Police Research and Developmen­t

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India