It is widely appreciated that we should be on alert for very unlikely but dangerous events like nuclear radiation on a large scale. Advances in technology mean that these threats have grown beyond easy comprehension, which may explain the laxity of our policy on important matters. like privacy. Dystopian fiction may have gone further than likely, but there are dangers lurking in the blatant misuse of data. We don’t need to take the latest James Bond thriller seriously, whose villains endanger the world with stolen genetic data encoded in gene-targeted viral weapons designed to wipe out particular families or entire gene pools. Can overtake Sars-CoV-2 in selectivity for If we fail to protect our bioidentical features, expand our thought pool of threats. Our regulatory framework portrays only benign uses of data, as we expect the law to take care of us and that public authorities such as law-enforcers will not go rogue. Still, leaks do happen, even if they are rare. This should call for a debate on the Criminal Procedure (Identity) Bill, 2022, which is set to give Indian police legal access to the biometric and biological data of convicts and potentially under-trials. As pitched, the basic idea is for police to bio-tag law breakers in their records to keep a watchful eye on them as they take fingerprints. However, it concerns all of our citizens, and there needs to be an explicit ban on this idea by a privacy framework that we still lack.
Under the bill’s proposals, as reported, the Prisoners’ Identification Act of 1920 would broaden the scope of what could so far be sought, including iris and retinal scans, analysis of physical and biological specimens, and “behavior”. related features”. A person’s signature, inter alia, for a database that will be maintained by the National Crime Records Bureau for 75 years. From a legal point of view, while the bill focuses on criminality, its text leaves room for data extraction from people other than the convicts. The proposal is clear on bio-samples, without proper clarity on who may be involved. can receive data and therefore requires tight security; For these, the consent of an arrested person shall be mandatory, provided the suspect has not been charged with sexual offenses against a child or woman, or of offenses punishable with imprisonment of at least seven years. While it may act as a safeguard, in a country where consent may depend on power. Questions in lock-up, awareness levels are low and while some may rely on the pre-test ‘right to remain silent’, this may be lost in the process of profile creation. Given how vague the divide between norms and exceptions can prove to be in practice, even the slightest risk of people not yet found guilty could expose many Indians to security risks that could over time pose a risk to the biotech prospects. will get worse as it expands.
There is no doubt that DNA and biometric grabs are valuable tools of crime solving today. Nevertheless, this utility needs to be filtered by our basic right to privacy, as upheld by our Supreme Court but not yet given a legislative shape. Tools such as narco analysis and brain mapping should be regulated in the context of that right, as should the collection, storage and use of genetic data. Any aspect of the law that undermines our privacy must not only be kept free from ambiguity in its application, but must also be put to a careful cost-versus-benefit test before it is adopted. This would help allay concerns about a civilian protester facing the prospect of having a police record with offensive details.
download
The app will get 14 days of unlimited access to Mint Premium absolutely free!