Telephone interception (‘tapping’): India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Interception norms
The Times of India, Jun 18 2016
Interception norms amended thrice
A few years after the advent of mobile telephony in India, the Centre in 1999 amended the Indian Telegraph Rules to regulate and streamline interception of telephone calls and messages. With service providers multiplying in different telecom zones, the Centre again amended the rules in March 2007. After conversations of former lobbyist Niira Radia with politicians, bureaucrats, businessmen and journalists were leaked into the public domain and the Su preme Court expressed concern while dealing with a petition by Ratan Tata complaining of violation of right to privacy , the Centre amended the rules yet again in January 2014 to make the norms more stringent. The basic guidelines remained the same -order for interception could be issued by the home secretary in the Centre and states. In an emergency , such orders could be issued by a home ministry authorised joint secre tary-level officer.
In situations where such orders could not be obtained, the investigating officer could order interception provided this order was approved within 15 days. The 1999 amendment said an order of interception would remain valid for 90 days and was extendable up to 180 days. All interception orders were to be reviewed by a committee headed by the cabinet secretary (at the Centre) or chief secretary (at state level) within 60 days of commencement of interception to prevent misuse of power.
The 2007 amendment limi ted the period of interception to 60 days, extendable up to 180 days. For the first time, it talked about service providers designating two nodal officers who would be responsible for implementation of orders for interception of calls and messages. It reduced the period for approval for interception in emergency situations to seven days from 15 days provided in the 1999 amendment.
The 2014 amendment reduced the various approval periods, recognising that issues relating to interception had to be dealt with expeditiously to prevent misuse.