Right to Privacy a Fundamental Right, Says Indian Supreme Court
A lot of conversations about expanding rights, end up with a distinction between positive and negative rights. A right to water, is different to free speech. For everyone to have a right to water, someone needs to provide the water or be held accountable for not providing it. A default, state culprit needs to be designated.Privacy though, privacy is like speech or equality before the law or presumption of innocence. You have it by default and if it’s denied there is a culprit.Even in this case, we seem to have a hard time expanding rights. I say expanding, but privacy is a right in many places, formally. But, the interpretation of that right is very weak.Anyway… if we’re to make privacy a right with serious intent then there needs to be a willingness to break eggs, bear a cost. The right to free speech, conscience, affiliation , assembly and other political freedoms mean we need to tolerate and protect the proverbial nazis’ rights to try and spread their politics. Bitter pill for anyone scared of a proverbial nazi takeover.Are we willing to bear the (fear-based, mostly) costs in the fight against the terrorism demon. The economic costs that will be claimed by companies relying on data? If we have a strong yes, I think we can start building the real framework of laws and conventions that will secure a right to privacy for the next few generations.Absolute principles require some sacrifice.