4. Conflict of Rights: DPDP Act vs. RTI Act before the Constitution Bench

Summary of Key Highlights • Constitutional Reference: The Supreme Court has referred petitions challenging the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 to a Constitution Bench to determine if it undermines the Right to Information (RTI) framework. • The Section 44(3) Controversy: Petitioners argue that Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amends Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, creating a \'blanket ban\' on the disclosure of any personal information, regardless of public interest.• The \'Hammer vs. Chisel\' Argument: Legal experts contend the government has used a \'hammer\' to prioritize privacy over transparency, removing the discretionary power of Public Information Officers (PIOs) to weigh disclosure against privacy. • Redefining Personal Information: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) noted that the court must now legally define \'personal information\' to resolve the overlap between the fundamental Right to Privacy and the statutory Right to Information. • Amendment of Section 8(1)(j): Previously, RTI allowed the disclosure of personal information if it related to public activity or interest; the new law is alleged to have deleted these crucial \'public interest\' exceptions. • State Discretion: Concerns have been raised that the government is extending the fundamental right to privacy—originally meant for citizens—to the State itself to shield official data from public scrutiny. Key Definitions • Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act: A provision that originally exempted personal information from disclosure unless the Public Information Officer was satisfied that the larger public interest justified the disclosure. • Section 44(3) of DPDP Act: The specific amendment that modifies the RTI Act by prohibiting the disclosure of personal information of any individual without the nuanced \'public interest\' balancing test previously used. • Constitution Bench: A bench of the Supreme Court consisting of five or more judges, formed to decide \'substantial questions of law\' regarding the interpretation of the Constitution. Constitutional & Legal Provisions • Article 19(1)(a): The Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression, which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include the \'Right to Information\' (State of UP v. Raj Narain). • Article 21: The Right to Life and Personal Liberty, which encompasses the \'Right to Privacy\' as a fundamental right (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India). • RTI Act, 2005: A landmark legislation designed to provide a practical regime for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities. • DPDP Act, 2023: India\'s first comprehensive data protection law aimed at regulating the processing of digital personal data while recognizing the right of individuals to protect their data. The Legal Evolution of Information vs. Privacy

Important Keypoints for UPSC • Balance of Rights: The case tests the doctrine of \'Harmonious Construction,\' where the court must balance two competing fundamental rights: the Right to Know and the Right to Privacy. • Accountability: RTI activists argue that without access to personal details of officials (e.g., assets, educational qualifications, or attendance), administrative accountability will collapse. • Democratic Transparency: The outcome will define whether the \'Right to Privacy\' can be used as a shield by public servants to avoid transparency in their official capacities. • Judicial Review: This case exemplifies the Supreme Court\'s role as the final arbiter of legislative validity when two central laws come into direct conflict. Conclusion The referral to a Constitution Bench marks a pivotal moment in India\'s digital jurisprudence. While the DPDP Act is essential for a modern digital economy, it cannot exist in a vacuum that stifles the transparency gains made over the last two decades. The Supreme Court\'s task is to ensure that the \'shield\' of privacy for the individual does not become a \'shroud\' of secrecy for the State. UPSC Relevance • GS Paper II: Statutory, regulatory and various quasi-judicial bodies; Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability; Right to Information; Judicial Review. • GS Paper IV: Ethics in Public Administration; Transparency and Information sharing in government. • Essay: \'Privacy vs. Transparency in the Digital Age\' or \'The evolving nature of Citizen-State relationship.\'