The Limits of Digital Mandates: Fundamental Rights and the Indian Government

It’s clear that the Indian government is pushing for more digital technology in different fields. While the idea of a digitally advanced India is great, there are worries about privacy. The fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution are vital to the Indian republic and restrict the government’s ability to enforce digital changes. This means the government can’t force everyone to adopt digital solutions without possibly violating these rights.

Fundamental Rights at Stake:

Several fundamental rights could be jeopardized by forceful digital mandates:

• Right to Equality (Article 14): Disadvantaging citizens who lack digital literacy, access to technology, or affordable internet creates unequal access to essential services like healthcare, education, and welfare schemes. This can be challenged under Article 14.
• Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)): Compelling citizens to use specific digital platforms for communication or access to information could be construed as restricting their freedom of choice and expression.
• Right to Privacy (Article 21): Mandatory collection and storage of personal data without adequate safeguards violates an individual’s right to privacy, now recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 following the Puttaswamy judgment. This is particularly relevant when dealing with Aadhaar authentication for accessing services.
• Right to Livelihood (Article 21): Forcing businesses and self-employed individuals to adopt digital modes of operation without adequate support and resources could jeopardize their livelihoods, violating Article 21.

Consequences and Legal Recourse:

If the government implements digital mandates that violate fundamental rights, it could face legal challenges in the courts. Citizens and organizations can approach the High Courts or the Supreme Court under Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies) to seek redressal. The courts have the power to issue various orders, including:

• Writs:
  • Writ of Mandamus: Compelling the government to perform a public duty, such as providing alternative offline options for services.
  • Writ of Certiorari: Quashing an order or regulation that violates fundamental rights.
  • Writ of Prohibition: Preventing the government from enforcing an unconstitutional rule.
  • Habeas Corpus: To secure the release of a person unlawfully detained.
  • Quo Warranto: To inquire into the legality of a person holding a public office.
• Declarations: Declaring a specific policy or law unconstitutional.
• Injunctions: Restraining the government from implementing a particular mandate.
• Damages: Ordering the government to compensate individuals who have suffered harm due to the violation of their rights.

Relevant Laws and Sections:

Besides fundamental rights provisions, specific laws can also be invoked to challenge digital mandates:

• Information Technology Act, 2000: While promoting e-governance, the Act also mandates data protection and privacy measures. If a digital mandate leads to data breaches or misuse of personal information, provisions related to data security and compensation for damages can be invoked.
• Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016: The Supreme Court has already laid down guidelines regarding the use of Aadhaar, emphasizing that it cannot be made mandatory for services where there is no law permitting it. Violations of these guidelines can be challenged.
• Consumer Protection Act, 2019: If a digital mandate detrimentally affects consumers or restricts their choices, they can seek redressal under this Act.

The Need for a Balanced Approach:

The government’s digital ambitions are crucial for progress, but a forceful, blanket approach can lead to exclusion and hardship for vulnerable sections of society. A balanced approach is necessary, one that:

• Ensures digital literacy and access: Invest in digital literacy programs and affordable internet access for all.
• Provides alternatives: Always offer offline alternatives to digital services, recognizing that not everyone can or wants to adopt digital platforms.
• Protects data privacy: Implement robust data protection laws and ensure transparency in data collection and usage.
• Conducts impact assessments: Before implementing digital mandates, assess the potential impact on different segments of society and address any potential inequalities.
• Engages in consultation: Consult with stakeholders, including civil society organizations and individuals, to design inclusive digital policies.

If the government takes a rights-based approach, it can use digital technology effectively while respecting the basic rights of every citizen, helping to create a truly inclusive digital India. The courts play an important role in keeping things fair, ready to defend citizens if the government goes too far in its efforts to transform digitally.

Also Read: