Data was sought to fix call drops: DOT

nNEW DELHI: A day after the emergence of a letter written by the Cellular Operators’ Association of India (COAI) to telecom secretary Anshu Prakash, which expressed concern over the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) seeking call data records in bulk, DOT clarified on Wednesday that the data had been sought to improve network quality and fixing call drops.

The government ruled out surveillance as the motive. The ripples of the row were felt in Parliament as the Congress brought adjournment motions in the Lok Sabha. The Congress alleged that the Centre’s move was an infringement of the Right to Privacy as “guaranteed by the Supreme Court in a 9-0 judgment”. The February 12 letter written by the head of the COAI, Ranjan Matthews, to telecom secretary Anshu Prakash had said, “It is most respectfully submitted that in all such monthly as well as ad-hoc bulk CDR details sought by various state units of DOT, neither the intended purpose for requirement of CDRS is mentioned nor the identity of the subscriber. Further CDRS sought for specific routes/areas may lead to allegations of surveillance, especially in the state like Delhi having numerous VVIP zones having offices and residences of ministers, MPS, judges etc.’’

The Centre issued a clarification that the requests for bulk CDRS was to “identify in a more scientific and innovative manner, the specific problem areas and routes where call drops occur”. The government statement said the DOT had developed an in-house software which needed bulk CDR data.

A COAI official said on condition of anonymity that telecom operators were bound by the Supreme Court guidelines to anonymise all CDRS unless it was a lawful interception that was done by one of the authorised agencies. However, he said that it was very difficult to anonymise CDRS that were sought by the government. For instance, the note to Prakash said that the entire call details of February 2, 3 and 4 were sought by the government on certain route locations in Delhi. “This will involve millions of calls and very difficult to pull them out,’’ said the COAI official.

The government note clarified that it was for “accurate information of call drops in specific areas. For this purpose, total data of calls made during any particular time period from the identified cellphone tower locations from where the complaints are received is collected to enable analysis”.

It added, “these data are anonymous and don’t contain names of either the maker or receiver of calls. Only if any call is terminated within 30 seconds and the same number is again dialled immediately, such calls are added to arrive at the final figure of call drops.”

The COAI responded to the government’s clarification, and maintained that it was willing to cooperate.

“The data sought from the service providers are as per the provisions of rules and as per the due process stipulated in the SOP [standard operating procedure],’’ said Matthews.