Opposite view

With reference to the editorial, “Privacy by choice” (July 28), there is an imminent need for a clear stand by the government on the issue of citizens’ right to privacy. It’s strange that the Attorney General thought it wise to express polar opposite views in two different cases in the Supreme Court on whether right to privacy is a fundamental right. 

He tried to justify his inconsistent stand by arguing that “even if it (right to privacy) is assumed to be a fundamental right, it is multifaceted”. Can he take such a polar opposite stand to “suit” the government, more so when the matter is being considered actively by the Supreme Court? 

I endorse the editorial’s observation that the state is “overreaching” its authority by making Aadhaar mandatory for filing tax returns. The top court has already ruled that Aadhaar should not be compulsory for any purpose other than when the government is offering special benefits under its various welfare schemes.

The government shows scant respect for that ruling and has been trying to “universalise” the use of Aadhaar among citizens. Why such a haste? The government should wait for the final outcome of the petition concerning the right to privacy of citizens, which is being heard by a bench of the Supreme Court.

Right to privacy must be preserved. For the present though, our hopes are pinned on the Supreme Court.

S Kumar   New Delhi 

Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to: 

The Editor, Business Standard

Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg 

New Delhi 110 002 

Fax: (011) 23720201  •  E-mail: letters@bsmail.in

All letters must have a postal address and telephone number