Rights or Secrecy: A Contradiction
One can say the passing of the Digital Security Act 2018 has been the talk of the town. A straightforward approach or tactic to keep a check on cybercrime, attacks on religious sentiments and values, or spreading propaganda, this law has flickered controversy among journalists. The bill shows zero tolerance against people spreading hate speech and propaganda that may taint the image of the nation.
There have been few amendments. Amongst some approved amendments, the bill incorporates the objectives of the Right to Information Act 2009, and The Official Secrets Act 1923. These changes brought to the bill create a confusion on the subject of whether the RTI and OSA can co-exist in the same frame.
Section 3 of the Digital Security Act 2018 states that it is supplementary to existing laws, “Whatever in any other act effective in the time being, directions made under the rules of this act will remain effective”. It made an addition of the RTI through this section which is positive since the RTI ensures the free flow of information.
The RTI is an example of how the government prioritizes and valued the freedom of thought and expression mentioned in the constitution. It was enacted with the aim to uphold accountability and transparency in all public, autonomous, and constitutional organizations.
But the aims and purposes of the law contradict legislations left by the colonial regime — primarily the Official Secrets Act. This stringent law was introduced by the British rulers under significantly different political circumstances, that is to say to protect its rule over India. It attends primarily to cases of undercover work — for instance, creating sketches, plans, or models, and current them to the enemy, directly or indirectly, which may hamper the sovereignty of a country. This culture of secrecy continues to be rampant among bureaucrats within the sub-continent. Human rights activists and pressure groups in have called to scrap this black law while the RTI was being enacted.
However, The RTI’s “right of the citizen to know” collides with OSA’s “right to secrecy.”
Surprisingly, the Digital Security Act crowds an unsettling rendezvous of both these laws. An amendment of Section thirty-two of the bill suggests that an individual can face penalization if he or she commits a crime mentioned within the Official Secrets Act through a pc, digital device, network, digital network, or the other digital media, or facilitate somebody else commit such crimes.
Under Section 32, any action of entering illegally into a government, semi-government, or autonomous organization, and covertly recording information/evidence and data through any electronic device will be considered as “spying” and carries a maximum sentence of 14 years or a fine of Twenty Five Lakhs Taka, or both. The amendment was approved by vote, and the Official Secrets Act was revitalized. But the question still remains: Isn’t the new act creating a paradox within itself?
The Digital Security Act 2018 has gone through several amendments and propositions with a view to tackling one of the dominant problems of the 21st Century which is cybercrime. But along with this change, it leaves some areas vague, which are likely to be misused. Though, one cannot completely neglect the possibility of espionage through online publication. The act tried to shed light on this activity, but with an old-fashioned touch.
While it is admirable to incorporate the RTI, it is similarly surprising to give OSA such unwanted attention. The existence of such an act from 1923 in such an updated act of 2018 is mysterious and prone to raise many questions in near future. The culture of secrecy among policy-makers and bureaucrats which is still enacted through law will bring back the question again and again that if RTI and OSA can stay the way it is or is need of an evaluation.
