SC Forms Expert Committee to Probe Pegasus Row; Right to Privacy Violation; To Be Examined

The Supreme Court on 27th October 2021(Wednesday) formed an independent committee of technical experts to investigate the Pegasus surveillance issue, saying the centre did not even try to justify its position on the issue. The Supreme Court urged the Commission to thoroughly investigate the allegations and submit a report to the court. It announced a hearing eight weeks later. The court constituted of a three-bench panel which will work under the supervision of former SC Judge R. V. Raveendran and will be comprised of Dr. Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Pravaharan P, Ashwin Anil Gumaste.

WHY IS IT IN NEWS?

On July 19, a consortium of 17 international media organizations published a survey of a list of leaked phone numbers from around the world called the Pegasus Project. These numbers are said to be the “target list” of phones that have been / will be hacked by the spyware product Pegasus sold by NSO Group in Israel. The list is clearly characterized not only by its size but also by the number of prominent journalists, dissidents from different countries, politicians, judges, businessmen, human rights activists, and heads of state. Some of the listed targets have worked with the Media Consortium and Amnesty International to legally investigate their own devices, and find evidence of a hacking attack using the Pegasus Suite.

(Infiltrating into a phone or computer using such ways and methods includes “hacking,” which is a criminal offense under the Information Technology Act 2000.)

WORKING OF THE PANEL:

According to the Supreme Court, the panel has been established to “investigate falsehoods and to find out the truth about the Pegasus row, as an infringement of citizens’ rights to privacy is a serious problem which needs to be investigated.” The bench also said there was “no specific denial” from the centre (with respect to the use of Pegasus software to spy on individuals). “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 SC ordered.

 The court’s remarks were made after the Centre repeatedly refused to provide detailed affidavits to the petitioner’s query because it was not the subject of public discussion or was not a “greater national interest.”