The technical committee appointed by the Supreme Court to probe the allegations of illegal spying done by the Central government using Israel spyware Pegasus, reached out to the public, seeking their comments on 11 questions by March 31.

The Committee was appointed by the Apex Court in October, 2021, under the guidance of retired Supreme Court judge, Justice R.V. Raveendran.

The questionnaire put up by the committee, comprises of queries such as whether the existing boundaries of state surveillance of personal and private communications of citizens for national security, defence of India, maintenance of public order, and prevention and investigations of offences, are well-defined and understood.

It further asked whether the procedures currently defined under the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the IT Act, 2000 (including executive oversight measures) to prevent the excessive routine use, misuse or abuse of state surveillance were sufficient or not?

Also Read: Supreme Court rejects SLP challenging legality of PM CARES Fund

Third question on the list is: Whether there should be special safeguards for specific categories of persons. If so, what categories of persons should these cover and what form should these take?

The questionnaire further sought views on the contexts and the extent to which the sovereign immunity and access should be afforded for acts of hacking digital devices and networks, technology backdoors, decryption of private records and legal mandates to share information under intermediary rules and data protection laws.

Whether the state should be obliged to record or disclose surveillance technology that it has access to or that it has used for the purposes of national security, has also been asked.

Next, it sought to know from public, who this information should be disclosed to and in what form. Also, whether this information should be available under the purview of Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Also Read: Centre mentions plea in SC against forceful eviction of government officials from Lutyens Zone

It further asked the people to suggest ways to strengthen the cyber security of the nation, apart from the laws and safeguards which should be put in place by the state to protect its citizens from targeted surveillance by non-state/private entities.

Next, it sought suggestions on the possible grievance redressal mechanism for a person, whose data was subjected to surveillance by the state, but where no crime or security threat was established from the data collection and processing exercise.

The expert committee was set up by the top court of the country to enquire, investigate and determine certain matters relating to the complaint of unauthorised use of Pegasus spyware against Indian citizens, in the Manohar Lal Sharma case.

Also Read: Supreme Court dismisses plea seeking postponement of NEET-MDS 2022

The technical committee comprises of Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Professor (Cyber Security and Digital Forensics)   and Dean, National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat;  Prabaharan P., Professor (School of Engineering), Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amritapuri, Kerala; and  Ashwin Anil Gumaste, Institute Chair Associate Professor (Computer Science and Engineering), Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Maharashtra.

As part of the Terms of Reference, the Technical Committee has been called upon to make recommendations regarding enactment or amendment to the existing law and procedures surrounding surveillance and for securing the improved right to privacy, enhancing and improving the cyber security of the nation and its assets, and ensuring prevention of invasion of citizens’ right to privacy, otherwise than in accordance with the law, by State and/or non-State entities.

The Supreme Court has decided to conduct hearing on the petitions accusing the Central government of spying on a number of politicians, activists and journalists with the help of Israel spyware Pegasus, on February 25.

The matter came up for hearing before a Bench led by Chief Justice (CJI) N.V. Ramana.

The Apex Court took the decision after Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta sought accommodation in view of another case slated to be heard tomorrow, in which he is appearing.

A three-member expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court to probe into the Pegasus surveillance scandal had submitted its interim report in the matter, which the top court was set to consider on February 23.

SG Mehta, however, requested the CJI that the matter be posted for Friday since he will be arguing in another case relating to validity of provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on February 23.

The CJI agreed.

“Yes, okay. Inform others too,” the CJI said.

On October 27 last year, the Supreme Court had appointed an expert committee headed by former Supreme Court judge, Justice RV Raveendran and assisted by Alok Joshi (former IPS Officer) and Dr. Sundeep Oberoi, Chairman, Sub Committee in (International Organisation of Standardisation/International Electro-Technical Commission/Joint Technical Committee).

In January this year, the expert committee constituted by the apex court had issued a public notice seeking details from citizens who have a reasonable cause to suspect that their devices were compromised by the Pegasus spyware.

So far, at least 13 people, including journalists N Ram, Siddharth Varadarajan and Paranjoy Guha Thakurta have deposed before the committee.

Recently, in early February, this year, a Special Court under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act allowed the investigating agency to submit seized mobile phones of seven accused from the Bhima Koregaon case of 2018 to the Supreme Court appointed technical committee probing the Pegasus spyware scandal.

Israel-based spyware firm NSO is best known for its Pegasus spyware, which it claims is sold only to “vetted governments” and not to private entities, though the company does not reveal which governments it sells the controversial product to.

Also Read: Supreme Court denounces indefinite delay in hearing pre-arrest bail plea by High Courts

An international consortium of news outlets, including the Indian news portal The Wire, had recently released a series of reports indicating that the said the software may have been used to infect the mobile devices of several persons including Indian journalists, activists, lawyers, officials, a former Supreme Court judge and others.

The reports had referred to a list of phone numbers that were selected as potential targets. Upon analysis by a team from Amnesty International, some of these numbers were found to have traces of a successful Pegasus infection, while some showed attempted infection, the reports had said.

A slew of petitions then came to be filed before the top court seeking probe into the allegations.

The petitioners included Advocate ML Sharma, Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas, Director of Hindu Group of publications N Ram and founder of Asianet Sashi Kumar, Editors Guild of India, journalists Rupesh Kumar Singh, Ipsa Shatakshi, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, SNM Abidi and Prem Shankar Jha.

In its judgment delivered on October 27 last year, the top court had berated the Central government for raising the argument of national security to defend its case, stating that it cannot be an omnibus argument to gain a free pass every time the Court exercises judicial review.

“State cannot get free pass every time by raising national security concerns. no omnibus prohibition can be called against judicial review. Centre should have justified its stand here and not render the court a mute spectator,” the top court said.

Also Read: Supreme Court agrees to hear plea seeking alternative to offline board exams on February 23

The Central government had earlier refused to file an official affidavit in the matter citing concerns of national security.

“There has been no specific denial by Centre (about use of Pegasus). Thus we have no option but to accept the submissions of petitioner prima facie and thus we appoint an expert committee whose function will be overseen by the Supreme Court,”

-the top court ordered.

The Court also said that while it is the era of information technology which is crucial for our daily lives, it is equally important to safeguard the privacy of citizens.

While there are restrictions on the right to privacy, the same are bound by Constitutional safeguards. Restrictions on privacy can be imposed only for prevention of terrorist activities in the interest of national security, the Court had held while constituting the expert committee.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice for admission to the Centre, says we need time to think as to what should be the further course of action.

The bench, led by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and also comprising Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, continued its hearing on a batch of petitions seeking SIT/judicial probe into the reports of snooping using the Israel spyware Pegasus.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted that this is a matter of National Security and the Centre does not wish to discuss this matter in public as this is a sensitive Issue and prayed to the court to form an Investigative committee.

Mr Mehta also assured the bench that the Centre will submit all the reports to the investigative committee as it requires the technical experts to understand the issue, the committee will then submit its report to the Supreme Court.

Thereafter, the bench said, “Issue Notice only to the government. Matter to be listed after 10 days. We will also deliberate upon the course of action.”

The Centre on August 16 had submitted a two-page affidavit, denying all the allegations against them.

The petitions are related to reports of alleged snooping by the government agencies on eminent citizens, politicians and scribes by using Israeli firm NSO’s spyware Pegasus.

Also Read: Judges’ safety: Supreme Court grants states, UTs a week to file counter-affidavits in suo motu PIL

An international media consortium had reported that over 300 verified Indian mobile phone numbers were on a list of potential targets for surveillance using Pegasus Spyware.

Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi; two Union Ministers – Prahlad Singh Patel (Minister of State for Jal Shakti) and Ashwini Vaishnaw (Railways and IT Minister); businessman Anil Ambani; a former CBI chief and at least 40 journalists were on the list on the leaked database of NSO. It is, however, not established that all phones were hacked. The Government has denied all allegations in the matter.

See order below:

The Supreme Court on Monday continued its hearing on a batch of petitions seeking SIT/judicial probe into the reports of snooping using the Israel spyware Pegasus.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who was representing Journalist N Ram, pointed out three issues in the affidavit of the Central government.

1. The Central Government has to state on oath if the Govt of India or any of its agency has used Pegasus. If they don’t, our arguments will be different. This fact must be denied or stated by them if Pegasus was ever used. They must state why facts stated in the petition are wrong, that the government of India or its agencies has nothing to do with Pegasus.
2. The Central Government says they have nothing to do with Pegasus. In one of the petitions by Editors Guild of India, in response to a question raised by Mr Owaisi, the Government said that spyware was developed by Israel group and stated that there are 121 users in India, This was in 2019. What have they done till then? That’s why they don’t want to respond to facts. This is a serious question, as many have said their phones were infiltrated.
3. I am more concerned with Institutions. Two Institutions which protect democracy are Journalism and Judiciary. They have been infiltrated! This Institution, which protects the rights of people, cannot be allowed to be infiltrated.

Thereafter, Mr Sibal took the Bench through the IT (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules 2009. Mr Sibal read out Rule 3, which said, “No person shall carry out interception or monitoring or decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under sub-section (2) of sec 69 of Act, except by an order issued by competent authority.”

Also Read: Supreme Court stays NGT action against BMC Commissioner

“Affidavit hasn’t even been filed by Home Secretary, it’s filed by Additional Secretary in Ministry of Information Technology . These matters are to be dealt with by the Home Secretary. If there has been an interception legally the Home Secretary will have all information. If he says he doesn’t know, it means everything was done outside law, which was knows since 2019,” he added.

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for SNM Abdi, submitted, “I endorse what Mr Sibal has said. There is nothing in the Minister’s statement that the Government is NOT using Pegasus. There’s nothing that says they haven’t used the facility & agencies are not using it.

“The petitioner’s phone was infiltrated. There is an analysis done by Amnesty. I would have been happy if the Government said the spyware wasn’t used. What’s important is if it was used against me.”

Mr Dwivedi, emphasising on the Puttaswamy case said, “When the scheme of Aadhar was examined, this court went into the entire scheme and concluded that the entire software was protected and there was no chance of leakage. In this case, nothing is indicated under what provision of law!

Also Read: Supreme Court issues notice to Centre on non-appointment of technical members in Security Appellate Tribunal

“There is no denial, no statement regarding law supporting the user or a statement that it wasn’t used against me. Give them time, these are statements they need to make. They haven’t stated who are going to be members of this Committee.

“If at all it’s constituted, it has to be an independent committee under supervision of this Court. The question in all petitions is against the government! So the government forming a committee will not create any confidence in people,” he added.

The bench, led by Chief Justice N. V. Ramana and also comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aniruddha Bose said, “If Government is reluctant and says they don’t want to file an affidavit, how do we compel them?”

“We will continue tomorrow. If you have a change of mind, let us know tomorrow,” the Bench told the Solicitor General.

Also Read: Supreme Court issues notice to Centre on non-appointment of technical members in Security Appellate Tribunal

The bench then adjourned the matter till tomorrow.

The petitions are related to reports of alleged snooping by the government agencies on eminent citizens, politicians and scribes by using Israeli firm NSO’s spyware Pegasus.

An international media consortium had reported that over 300 verified Indian mobile phone numbers were on a list of potential targets for surveillance using Pegasus Spyware.

Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi; two Union Ministers – Prahlad Singh Patel (Minister of State for Jal Shakti) and Ashwini Vaishnaw (Railways and IT Minister); businessman Anil Ambani; a former CBI chief and at least 40 journalists were on the list on the leaked database of NSO. It is, however, not established that all phones were hacked. The Government has denied all allegations in the matter.

The Supreme Court raised objection to the ‘Parallel Debate’ by the petitioners in the media and  deferred the proceeding till August 16 in the Pegasus Spyware case.

The Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice N. V. Ramana, Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Surya Kant took up the matter pertaining to the snooping on mobile phones of journalists, political figures and constitutional authorities through Israeli spyware Pegasus.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was appearing for the Government of India, informed the court that he has received pleas from the petitioners and has also requested the bench to grant him some time to file a reply. The bench gave time till August 16 to the Central Government to file the reply.

Senior Advocate Chander Uday Singh, representing Journalist N Ram, requested the bench to issue notice in this case, but the bench was not inclined to issue notice without hearing the Central Government.

The CJI also asked the petitioners not to give any misleading statement regarding the matter in the media and disapproved of the ‘Parallel Debates’ taken up by the petitioners on Pegasus issue. “We feel that any of the people who are interested in matters and are saying things in the media – we hope you will answer within Court. You must have faith in system,” said Justice Ramana.

Also Read: Complainant filed forged vakalatnama at the behest of accused: Allahabad High Court

The petitions are related to reports of alleged snooping by the government agencies on eminent citizens, politicians and scribes by using Israeli firm NSO’s spyware Pegasus.

An international media consortium has reported that over 300 verified Indian mobile phone numbers were on a list of potential targets for surveillance using Pegasus Spyware.

Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi; two Union Ministers – Prahlad Singh Patel (Minister of State for Jal Shakti) and Ashwini Vaishnaw (Railways and IT Minister); businessman Anil Ambani; a former CBI chief and at least 40 journalists were on the list on the leaked database of NSO. It is, however, not established that all phones were hacked. The Government has denied all allegations in the matter.