MHA seeks states’ response on framing rules
NEW DELHI: The ministry of home affairs has reached out to state home departments and stakeholders ahead of it formulating the rules for the Criminal Identification Act, a piece of legislation enacted in the Budget session this year, which allows law enforcement agencies to collect and retain biometric data of people accused in crimes, in addition to those convicted.
A person aware of the matter, who asked not to be named, said the rules will seek to address how, and for how long the data is stored, and whether those acquitted can have their biometrics deleted. It is may specify which law enforcement agencies will be empowered to collect the data. “There are a lot of nuances that need to be determined,” the person said, adding: “The idea is to chalk out an Act that covers all grey areas.”
When the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022, was introduced in Parliament in April, it was seen as controversial. The law accords powers to law enforcement agencies to collect biometric data of accused, convicted persons and detainees, and Union home minister Amit Shah said data of political detainees will not be collected. The bill was passed by a voice vote after Shah assured MPS it will not be misused.
The Act makes it mandatory for people to allow collection of finger impressions, palm print impressions, footprint impressions, photographs, iris and retina scans, physical and biological samples and their analysis, behavioural attributes, including signatures and handwriting, among others. The law also empowers the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) to collect, store and preserve these records for 75 years and share it with other agencies. Resistance or refusal to allow the collection of data is an offence.
The home minister had said in Lok Sabha that the data the data will be stored on a centrally located “protected platform” maintained by NCRB, leaving out any scope of its misuse. Lok Sabha passed the bill on Monday.
Many questions remain as to whether data of those slated to serve less than seven years should be collected. The Act may also come in conflict with the Data Protection Bill (which is still being finalised by government) which guarantees the right to be forgotten. “The law is inconsistent with the principles of the right to be forgotten. It provides that the records shall be retained digitally for 75 years which in many cases would violate the principle of purpose limitation. Even after that, no procedure has been envisaged for removal or deletion of the data,” said Kazim Rizvi, founder of policy think tank The Dialogue.
THE RULES SEEK TO ADDRESS HOW, AND FOR HOW LONG THE DATA IS STORED, AND WHETHER THOSE ACQUITTED CAN HAVE IT DELETED