Thread by @SFLCin

#Breaking_News
The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill, 2022, prima facie, fails to satisfy the tests laid down by the Supreme Court in the landmark decision in K.S. Puttaswamy (2017).
#CriminalProcedureIdentificationBill2022 #LokSabha #surveillance #privacymatters

The collection and processing of sensitive personal data such as biometric & biological samples for the purposes of identification do not, satisfy the test of proportionality.

The absence of any opportunity of hearing for persons refusing to allow their measurements to be taken highlights the failure to meet the State’s aim for promoting justice, as provided under Article 39A of the Constitution.

The Bill also expands the scope of taking the ‘measurements’ of convicts & non-convicts. It does so without any of the safeguards that existed under the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920.

#IMPORTANT
Persons not convicted of any crime can also be required to have their measurements taken, without any right of refusal either.

The sope of ‘measurements’ has itself been expanded to include biometric identification, iris and retina scans, biological samples, besides other sensitive personal data. Persons who are arrested for offences under any law “may not be obliged” to give their biological samples.

Such loosely framed phraseology of provisions would lead to several interpretations and hence, lead to human rights violations and more litigations.

Offences on the basis of which measurements can be taken, include the severely criticized preventive detention law.

Further, violating established principles of natural justice, there is also no opportunity of hearing granted to persons refusing to have their measurements taken. No recourse to judicial review is made available either.

The NCRB shall be the main repository to collect, store, process and share all records of measurements. This is extremely concerning in the lack of a comprehensive Data Protection Act which lays down proper guidelines for such collection, storage, processing and sharing.

The widespread use of the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System (CCTNS) further highlights the importance of data-sharing principles being in place.

In the lack of any discussion of data protection principles relating to purpose limitation, data minimization, confidentiality and strong security safeguards, the NCRB should refrain from processing sensitive data in such large troves.

Records are going to be retained for 75 years, more than the average life expectancy of the individual; another highly questionable decision.

Finally, there remains a wide scope for mis-use and data leakages taking place in absence of a robust Data Protection framework.
Stay tuned as we share a detailed analysis of the Bill.

!Freedom needs fighters like you!

Support us in fighting for stronger privacy rights by making a small donation.

Donate Today - sflc.in/donate

#donate #HumanRights #CivilSociety #DigitalDefenders #CriminalProcedureIdentificationBill2022