Centre tells Delhi HC every protest is videographed as accepted law-and-order measure
New Delhi, July 24 (IANS) The Delhi High Court on Friday deferred till July 27 the hearing on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging continuous police surveillance of student protesters at Jantar Mantar, after the Centre defended videography of public demonstrations as a routine law-and-order measure and argued that there can be no reasonable expectation of privacy at a public protest.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said it would continue hearing the matter on Monday after hearing extensive submissions from both sides on the scope of the right to privacy in the context of public protests.
Raising a preliminary objection, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that videography of public protests is an accepted mechanism for maintaining law and order and is undertaken in terms of standing orders issued pursuant to Supreme Court directions.
The Centre’s law officer argued that every major protest is routinely videographed and that organisers themselves undertake to comply with the applicable standing orders.
SG Mehta submitted that while privacy is a fundamental right, it is not absolute and can be reasonably restricted where there exists a legitimate State interest.
He contended that videography enables authorities to identify persons responsible in the event of any untoward incident during a protest.
The Solicitor General further argued that a claim of privacy in the context of a public demonstration was misplaced, particularly when protesters themselves voluntarily record videos, conduct interviews and circulate reels on social media platforms.
“There can be no expectation of privacy in a public protest unless there is intrusion into a person’s private life,” SG Mehta submitted.
Responding to the petitioner’s concerns, he argued that accepting such a contention would effectively require a prohibition on all forms of videography, including recordings made on mobile phones.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Nandita Rao relied on the Supreme Court’s landmark K.S. Puttaswamy judgment to argue that the right to privacy extends even to persons participating in demonstrations held in public places.
She submitted that any restriction on the right to privacy must satisfy the constitutional tests of legality, legitimate state purpose and proportionality, and contended that surveillance by the government cannot be carried out without a clear legal framework, procedural safeguards and data protection measures.
Rao claimed that plainclothes police personnel were recording protesters, including female students aged between 16 and 20 years, and referred to media reports claiming that AI-enabled live facial recognition technology was being deployed at the protest site.
She argued that reliance on facial recognition technology could potentially expose innocent individuals to criminal prosecution and submitted that surveillance by the government stood on an entirely different footing from recordings made by private individuals or journalists.
She further submitted that police surveillance without statutory safeguards could have a chilling effect on democratic dissent and urged the Delhi High Court to direct the authorities to place on record the procedure governing such surveillance, including safeguards relating to storage and use of recorded data.
During the hearing, the CJ Upadhyaya-led Bench observed that the legal position on the right to privacy was well settled and observed that similar petitions concerning the issue were already pending before the High Court.
It suggested that the petitioner could seek impleadment in those proceedings, but Rao maintained that the present petition was distinct as it had been filed prior to the police action on July 20 and specifically challenged continuous surveillance of protesters rather than the subsequent police action.
After hearing both sides at length, the Delhi High Court deferred further hearing to July 27.
The PIL has been filed by former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) president Aishe Ghosh, alleging that peaceful protesters at Jantar Mantar have been subjected to continuous photography, videography and surveillance by the police, extending even to routine activities at the designated protest site.
The petition alleges that such monitoring has become an instrument of intimidation against student protesters and seeks a legal framework governing surveillance, including safeguards relating to data protection and use of facial recognition technology.
Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court had issued notice to the Centre and Delhi Police on a separate batch of PILs alleging excessive use of force during the recent CJP-led ‘Sansad Chalo’ march over the NEET paper leak.
While seeking responses from the authorities, the High Court had directed preservation of CCTV footage, videography and other relevant records relating to the July 20 protest, with the matter listed for further hearing in September.
–IANS
pds/rad
