<p>Privacy advocates have found fault with the Justice B N Srikrishna Committee report on data protection law, saying there are many exceptions for processing of data by the government and it could lead to diluting the rights of citizens.</p>.<p>A group of young lawyers under the banner 'Save Our Privacy', supported by the Internet Freedom Foundation, has said that many gaps reveal themselves in the current documents submitted by Justice Srikrishna committee, though the development of a data protection framework in India is encouraging.</p>.<p>"Many exceptions for processing of data by the government can be seen. This seems to dilute the rights of the citizens with respect to their data vis-à-vis the state," they said in a statement.</p>.<p>"There is a dire need for surveillance law reform in India. It was our hope that this effort would provide a comprehensive framework overhauling surveillance and interception in India — in consonance with the international standards on necessary and proportionate principles, along with providing proper judicial scrutiny. However, the report and bill do not seem to provide substantive changes in the surveillance regime in India," they said.</p>.<p>The 'Save Our Privacy' campaign said it will continue their struggle by engaging with the government and elected lawmakers. “This report is not the end of the process, but instead marks the beginning of the development of a comprehensive data protection and privacy regulation in India. A strong privacy and data protection law must come into force before our next General Election, this is a critical step to protect our increasingly digital democracy," they said.</p>.<p>They said the onus now lies on the government and eventually Parliament to provide a comprehensive data protection and privacy framework. “Having said that, it is important that a thorough and transparent public consultation is now undertaken on the draft bill before it is passed by Parliament. The government is mandated to do so under its own Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy of 2014," they said.</p>
<p>Privacy advocates have found fault with the Justice B N Srikrishna Committee report on data protection law, saying there are many exceptions for processing of data by the government and it could lead to diluting the rights of citizens.</p>.<p>A group of young lawyers under the banner 'Save Our Privacy', supported by the Internet Freedom Foundation, has said that many gaps reveal themselves in the current documents submitted by Justice Srikrishna committee, though the development of a data protection framework in India is encouraging.</p>.<p>"Many exceptions for processing of data by the government can be seen. This seems to dilute the rights of the citizens with respect to their data vis-à-vis the state," they said in a statement.</p>.<p>"There is a dire need for surveillance law reform in India. It was our hope that this effort would provide a comprehensive framework overhauling surveillance and interception in India — in consonance with the international standards on necessary and proportionate principles, along with providing proper judicial scrutiny. However, the report and bill do not seem to provide substantive changes in the surveillance regime in India," they said.</p>.<p>The 'Save Our Privacy' campaign said it will continue their struggle by engaging with the government and elected lawmakers. “This report is not the end of the process, but instead marks the beginning of the development of a comprehensive data protection and privacy regulation in India. A strong privacy and data protection law must come into force before our next General Election, this is a critical step to protect our increasingly digital democracy," they said.</p>.<p>They said the onus now lies on the government and eventually Parliament to provide a comprehensive data protection and privacy framework. “Having said that, it is important that a thorough and transparent public consultation is now undertaken on the draft bill before it is passed by Parliament. The government is mandated to do so under its own Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy of 2014," they said.</p>
