Identity and Privacy: The Hindu Editorial on the Identification of Prisoners Bill

Central government’s latest proposalTo enable the collection of biometric and biological data from prisoners, in addition to normal physical measurements, photographs and fingerprints, raises serious questions about its legal validity. Such questions are inevitable in an era in which people view official efforts to collect personal data with suspicion. Backed by colonial law of 1920, the practice of recording photographs and fingerprints of prisoners in the country dates back more than a century. The central government now proposes to expand the idea of ​​taking “measurements” to cover “fingerprints”. , palm prints, footprints, … physical, biological specimens and their analysis”, also “behavioral features including signatures” [and] handwriting”. The Criminal Procedure (Identity) Bill, 2022, which symbolizes this goal, has been introduced in the Lok Sabha. Some members have argued that the bill goes against the landmark Supreme Court ruling that declared privacy a fundamental right KS Puttaswamy, Some argued that the bill enabled the forced drawing of samples and possibly violated Article 20(3), which protects the right against self-incrimination. There are also other concerns, such as the means by which the collected data will be protected, shared, transmitted and destroyed. The bill allows records to be preserved for 75 years, and to be destroyed first if the person is discharged or acquitted.

Concerns over privacy and security of data are undoubtedly important. Practices that involve the collection, storage and destruction of important details of a personal nature should be undertaken only after a strong data protection law, with severe punishment for breaches. The 1920 law enabled measures to be taken from convicts sentenced to prison terms of one year and more, and anyone arrested on a charge that attracted such prison term; And third, one who has presented a bond for good behavior and peace. However, the present Bill covers all convicts, and any person arrested under any law or detained under any preventive detention law. There is a provision by which an arrested person, who is not accused of an offense against a woman or a child, or attracts a sentence of imprisonment of seven years or more, may not permit the taking of samples. Not all detainees may be aware that they may actually refuse to take biological samples. And it can be easy for the police to ignore such a refusal and later claim that they took the detainee’s consent. The bill is controversial, as there is a growing tendency to arrest and make serious charges against activists, protesters and even innocent people. It would suit the situation if it is sent to the Standing Committee for thorough scrutiny before it becomes a law.