Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorBhandari, Vrinda
dc.contributor.authorKak, Amba
dc.contributor.authorParsheera, Smriti
dc.contributor.authorRahman, Faiza
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-20T15:13:10Z
dc.date.available2017-11-20T15:13:10Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn2381-3652
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/54766
dc.description.abstractOn 24th August 2017, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India passed a historic judgment affirming the constitutional right to privacy. It declared privacy to be an integral component of Part III of the Constitution of India, which lays down our fundamental rights, ranging from rights relating to equality (Articles 14 to 18); freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a)); freedom of movement (Article 19(1)(d)); protection of life and personal liberty (Article 21) and others. These fundamental rights cannot be given or taken away by law, and all laws and executive actions must abide by them. The Supreme Court has, however, clarified that like most other fundamental rights, the right to privacy is not an "absolute right". Subject to the satisfaction of certain tests and benchmarks, a person's privacy interests can be overridden by competing state and individual interests. This post discusses the tests that have been laid down by the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy case, against which privacy infringements will be evaluated going forward. Based on this analysis, the post argues that a majority of the judges in this decision have agreed that the European standard of proportionality shall be applied to test privacy infringements in the future. However, the rigor and technicality with which this doctrine is applied will depend on the nature of the competing interests in question and will evolve on a case by case basis. At the very least, any impugned action will continue to be tested on the "just, fair and reasonable" standard evolved under Article 21 of the Constitution. However, before we delve into the standards laid down by the Court, it is important to understand why the Supreme Court was called upon to decide if we have a fundamental right to privacy and how to read the decision it finally delivered.en
dc.languageen
dc.subject.ddcRechtde
dc.subject.ddcLawen
dc.titleAn Analysis of Puttaswamy: The Supreme Court's Privacy Verdict
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalIndraStra Global
dc.publisher.countryUSA
dc.source.issue11
dc.subject.classozRechtde
dc.subject.classozLawen
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-54766-2
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine Bearbeitungde
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modificationsen
ssoar.contributor.institutionNational Institute of Public Finance & Policy, New Delhi, India
internal.statusnoch nicht fertig erschlossen
dc.type.stockarticle
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo5
internal.identifier.classoz40101
internal.identifier.journal858
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc340
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence3
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
dc.subject.classhort40100
internal.pdf.version1.4
internal.pdf.validtrue
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizerCERTAIN
internal.check.languageharmonizerCERTAIN_RETAINED


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record