UIDAI to SC: Tender expired, no plan to hire agency for social media management
The Indian Express
The UIDAI said the
tender was put on hold till further directions after the PIL was filed. In the
present case, UIDAI told the court that the tender for hiring the agency was
floated in 2018 through the Central Procurement Portal.
With its plans to hire an agency for
social media management coming under legal challenge, the Unique Identification
Authority of India (UIDAI) on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that the tender
floated for this had “expired”, and it had no plans to revive that.
The UIDAI communicated this to a
bench of Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph, which was hearing a PIL by Trinamool
Congress MP Mahua Moitra who
alleged that the project was intended for “mounting surveillance on social
media platforms”.
The UIDAI said the tender was put on
hold till further directions after the PIL was filed. Moitra had earlier challenged the
Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s plan to set up a social media hub.
Following the litigation, the Centre had dropped the plan.
In the present case, UIDAI told the
court that the tender for hiring the agency was floated in 2018 through the
Central Procurement Portal. It was “never pursued further and had automatically
expired”. UIDAI said it “neither has any plans to revive the same tender nor is
floating similar tender again”.
In her plea, filed through advocates
Mohammad Nizam Pasha and Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Moitra pointed out that UIDAI had
come out with a Request for Proposal (RFP) inviting tenders for this, and its
“scope of work as per the RFP” includes appointing a private agency and
assigning to it the task, inter alia, of employing a “Social Listening Tool” to
monitor social media platforms.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior
advocate Abhishek Singhvi had contended that the “impugned RFP
violates…fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of
the Constitution…the same aims to mount surveillance on social media
platforms”.
The petitioner argued that the tool
was “an attempt by the State to overreach the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble
Court in matters where legality of social media surveillance and Aadhaar itself
is under challenge and this Court is seized of these issues”.
The plea contended that “through this
back door, the State through its agency is seeking to aggregate this power of
information about individuals in its hands without authority of law and without
any corresponding checks and balances on that power in the form of a data
protection regime. It is settled law that the placing of unguided and
uncontrolled discretionary power in the hands of the executive is violative of
Article 14 of Constitution.”
The plea stated, “While surveillance
by agents of the State is itself violative of the right to privacy, in this
case, privacy of the citizens is sought to be placed at the mercy of non-state
actors, which reeks of manifest arbitrariness.”
Comments
Post a Comment