The government is drafting the Right to Privacy Bill, which entails penalty, including revocation of operators? licences, for illegally intercepting telephone calls and making their content public.
The bill , which is likely to be tabled in the next Parliament session, also aims at establishing a data protection authority of India (DPAI) to monitor and enforce compliance of all provisions and receive and investigate complaints about alleged violations of rules pertaining to data protection.
The bill also makes provisions for penalising the head of any department, who circulates the intercepted data in public. While illegal interception can lead to imprisonment for five years and a fine of up to Rs 0.1 million, individuals involved in circulating an intercepted communication faces a prison term of three years and with a fine up to Rs 50,000.
The bill stated, “Any person who knowingly and willfully requests or obtains any record concerning an individual from any person or officer of the government or any agency thereof under false pretences shall be punishable with fine which may extend to Rs 0.5 million.?
“In case of violation of licence conditions pertaining to maintenance of secrecy and confidentiality of information and unauthorised interception of communication, the service provider shall be liable for suspension or revocation of their licences,? it adds.
The DPAI will probe any data security breach and issue orders, as may be required to safeguard the security interests of all affected individuals.
According to the bill, DPAI shall consist of a chairperson and two members who have knowledge and experience of data protection, finance, law management and consumer affairs. These individuals shall be selected by the government. The members to be appointed to this authority should have served in the central or state government.
The bill proposes that “where an offence under this act has been committed by any government department, the head of the department shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly unless he proves that the offence was committed without his/her knowledge or he/she exercised due diligence to prevent the commission of such an offence.”
