[HN Gopher] Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection...
___________________________________________________________________
Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill
Author : techmagus
Score : 157 points
Date : 2022-08-04 09:44 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.accessnow.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.accessnow.org)
| HelloNurse wrote:
| The article seems to suggest a relatively good bill shot down by
| a weak or corrupt government that serves the interests of big
| companies with bad practices who don't want to be sued, actual
| data predators, etc.
|
| But without details, "Personal Data Protection" can be newspeak
| for government-sanctioned abuse, like laws against "Child
| Pornography" that are actually intended to establish interception
| platforms. Are there good summaries of these Indian laws?
| portpecos wrote:
| I question your claim of a weak or corrupt government based on
| the article below. It sounds like there was pushback from
| Startups who complained about compliance intensity, concerns
| about definitions of data storage when it came to adversarial
| countries, and a host of other concerns:
|
| History:
|
| In 2017, the Indian Supreme Court recognised the right to
| privacy as a fundamental right within the ambit of the
| Constitution. The top court had directed the Centre to come up
| with a data protection framework for the country. The data
| protection law for India has been in the works since 2018, when
| a panel led by Justice Srikrishna, a retired judge of the
| Supreme Court, drew up a draft version of a Bill. The draft was
| reviewed by the JCP, which submitted its recommendations along
| with a draft Bill in November 2021.
|
| Why has the Bill been withdrawn?
|
| In a note circulated to Members of Parliament, Union IT
| Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw explained the reason behind the
| withdrawal of the Bill: "The Personal Data Protection Bill,
| 2019 was deliberated in great detail by the Joint Committee of
| Parliament. 81 amendments were proposed and 12 recommendations
| were made towards a comprehensive legal framework on the
| digital ecosystem. Considering the report of the JCP, a
| comprehensive legal framework is being worked upon. Hence, in
| the circumstances, it is proposed to withdraw 'The Personal
| Data Protection Bill, 2019' and present a new Bill that fits
| into the comprehensive legal framework.
|
| The Bill was also seen as being too "compliance intensive" by
| startups of the country, The Indian Express had reported
| earlier. According to government sources, the revamped Bill
| will be much easier to comply with, especially for startups.
|
| So what could the revamped Bill look like?
|
| Specific provisions or contours of the upcoming new Bill are
| not known. But a senior official said that on the question of
| data localisation, the government is considering whether to add
| it to the planned new version of the Information Technology
| Act, and whether to allow cross-border data flows only to
| "trusted geographies"
|
| When is the revamped Bill expected to be ready?
|
| Minister of State for Electronics and IT Rajeev Chandrasekhar
| said the government will table the new legislation in
| Parliament "very quickly". "The government has today withdrawn
| the Personal Data Protection Bill that was formulated in 2018
| and re-written by the JCP in 2021," Chandrasekhar said on
| Wednesday (August 3). "After considerable deliberation and
| examination of the JCP's report, it was found that there is a
| need for a comprehensive redrawing of laws and rules taking
| into account some of the JCP's comments and the emerging
| challenges and opportunities that arise from there. A
| comprehensive approach to the laws will be undertaken by the
| government and we will come back to Parliament very quickly
| after following the process of consultation," he said.
|
| According to sources in the IT Ministry, the government is
| aiming to bring the legislation in Parliament's Winter Session.
| A senior official said that the new Bill would incorporate the
| broader ideas of data protection as recommended by the JCP, and
| would be in line with the Supreme Court's landmark privacy
| judgment of 2017. Given the significant number of amendments
| suggested by the JCP, it was necessary to comprehensively
| redraw the contours of the proposed law, the official said.
|
| https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-sci-te...
|
| As a side note: I don't know why AccessNow.org's blog post was
| upvoted. It's extremely light on details.
| 1sembiyan wrote:
| Did the 2019 bill have any impact on the extant data collection
| practices?
| kobiguru wrote:
| In case you are serious about understanding why it was pulled out
| and really care about the details for such an action, I highly
| recommend you check the Joint Committee on the Personal Data
| Protection report [1] the Press Release section where they
| released the 534 pages report on it.
|
| Gist of it is - the committee recommended major changes across
| the board in all sections of the act so the IT Ministry would
| rework the bill and present it for discussion again in the
| parliament.
|
| I know India looks like a lawless place because of the chaotic
| news coverage in the NYtimes but it is a democracy and most if
| not all government action have rational policy choices that
| presented in the Indian parliament. The loksabha proceedings
| (especially the question hour) is the best way to understand what
| goes on in India.
|
| Edit: For those without a lot of time should check the point by
| point explanation and rebuttal for the recommendations here [2]
|
| 1.
| http://loksabhaph.nic.in/Committee/CommitteeInformation.aspx...
|
| 2. https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/wp-
| content/uploads/2022/01/JPC-P...
| venkat223 wrote:
| They plan to bring very stringent bill to takeaway alldemocracy
| and freedom from the net.
| LightG wrote:
| You've got to be joking ...
| krageon wrote:
| "It is a democracy" doesn't mean that it isn't also a
| frequently irrational cesspit. That doesn't necessarily mean
| it's any worse than at least two other superpowers, but it does
| mean it's not good. It's not due to the NYTimes coverage that
| the country seems the way it does, it's the exported culture
| (i.e. it is the face of IT-related international crime) and the
| types of incidents that can be found there (closing off an
| entire province full of normal people just because some of them
| do things you don't like is strictly barbaric, for example).
| naruvimama wrote:
| donedealomg wrote:
| zepearl wrote:
| I glanced over [2] ( https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/wp-
| content/uploads/2022/01/JPC-P... ) => right at the start it
| mentions this:
|
| _The Committee observes that it is impossible to distinguish
| personal and non-personal data. Therefore..._
|
| That sounds to me like a crazy statement for a new law that was
| in the process of being created since years?
| potamic wrote:
| > the committee recommended major changes across the board in
| all sections of the act
|
| This bill was under discussion for 3 years. Every year the JCP
| keeps proposing new and different changes. After all this if
| you have 81/99 amendments, you have to question if it is
| nitpicking and stalling, especially when you have things like
| the Finance Bill and Farm Bill that get passed in record time.
|
| This seems like a political decision more than anything. There
| is also the fact that the industry does not like this bill at
| all, there are some powerful corporations who entered the
| digital consumer space recently and would be seriously
| inconvenienced by this move.
| kobiguru wrote:
| Not everything is political. I can tell you this because I
| work with many of indian government departments very closely.
| The reservations JPC highlighted will be studied and after
| consultation with stakeholders it will tabled again.
|
| FYI - The committee chairman and the IT Minister are from the
| same political party yet they disagreed and bill got pulled.
|
| Here is a good premier on the JPC Recommendation [1]
|
| https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/wp-
| content/uploads/2022/01/JPC-P...
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Are these new concerns or concerns that arose during the
| preceding 3 years of discussions that remained unaddressed?
| eatonphil wrote:
| Are there any reputable Indian law/policy news sites or
| individuals who you (or anyone) might recommend following?
|
| To be fair I can't think of any specific sites like that I
| follow for US law/policy news, just a variety of people on
| Twitter.
| kobiguru wrote:
| live Law is a legal news website and not really a policy site
| so is the others mentioned in the thread.
|
| Vidhi is a legal policy think tank based.
|
| They did a point by point break down of recommendations of
| JPC and explanation you can check it here [1]
|
| https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/research/referencer-on-the-
| jpcs-...
| felixg3 wrote:
| Economic Political & Weekly, caravanmagazine.in,
| restofworld.org
| eatonphil wrote:
| Thanks!
|
| I've followed restofworld.org for a year now and it's a
| really fantastic site, great mission.
|
| However their scope is extremely broad: "Everything in
| developing economies for Americans", basically.
| woweoe wrote:
| I think caravan might be extremely left wing though.
| mynameismon wrote:
| > _Are there any reputable Indian law /policy news sites or
| individuals who you (or anyone) might recommend following?_
|
| https://www.livelaw.in is a pretty good one, it is usually
| very upto date and accurate.
| pvsukale3 wrote:
| https://prsindia.org/
| alephnerd wrote:
| India is a diverse country with diversity within both the
| federal level and the state level. I have listed a subset of
| sources I and friends of mine from Indian policy backgrounds
| (IAS, IPS, MHA, etc) tended to trust. This is not a complete
| list, and shows my own regional biases.
|
| Feel free to AMA me or discuss additional recommendations in
| this thread. I don't get much of an opportunity to discuss
| Social Sciences since I switched careers to the Tech world.
|
| edit:
|
| I will not dignify any flame-bait conversations. I will chat
| with people from any political camp, but only if they chat in
| a non-combative manner.
|
| ======================
|
| General Journalism:
|
| Most newspapers and news media channels in India are owned by
| Oligarchs supporting one party or the other.
|
| The only Indian newspaper I've personally trusted is The
| Tribune (https://www.tribuneindia.com/) due to it's being
| owned by a non-profit foundation with a perpetual endowment
| created by a banking magnate back in the late 19th century.
|
| ======================
|
| Long Form Journalism:
|
| The Caravan - https://caravanmagazine.in/
|
| Has a bit of a center-left and progressive leaning, but
| pretty well investigated and written articles.
|
| The Print - https://theprint.in/
|
| Has a bit of a center-right leaning, but strong informed
| articles on Indian Defence Policy and Developmental News (I
| think they have some ex-MoD and IAS beats).
|
| The Wire - https://thewire.in/
|
| Has a center-left leaning, but a good source for articles on
| the negative ground realities that exist in various different
| regions of South Asia. Also surprisingly strong at Indian
| Foreign Policy (I think they have some ex-MEA beats)
|
| Himal Magazine - https://www.himalmag.com/
|
| Has a center-left and progressive leaning, but a strong
| source on the anthropological and sociological aspects of
| South Asian studies.
|
| Swarajya - https://swarajyamag.com/
|
| Has a center-right to far right leaning, but a strong source
| to understand BJP and Hinduvta politics from their
| perspective.
|
| Outlook India - https://www.outlookindia.com/
|
| Good long form journalism and analysis. Haven't noticed much
| bias one way or the other as they tend to publish ideologues
| from all spectrums of Indian politics.
|
| ======================
|
| Public Policy Think Tanks and Journals:
|
| Observer Research Foundation - https://www.orfonline.org/
|
| Amazing articles and papers on South Asian Foreign Policy and
| Developmental Economics. Centrist/Institutionalist bias as it
| is staffed by ex-IAS and policymaker types
|
| Carnegie India Foundation - https://carnegieindia.org/
|
| Similar as ORF, but with a stronger bias towards IR.
|
| Economic and Political Weekly - https://www.epw.in/
|
| One of the premier Indian Social Sciences journals. Very
| strong articles on South Asian social sciences in general.
|
| Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy - https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/
|
| Amazing organization working on legal policy analysis in
| India. Very easy to read for those who are not from a legal
| background
|
| Centre de Sciences Humaines Delhi - https://www.csh-
| delhi.com/
|
| Strong research on developmental economics and regional
| socio-political dynamics in South Asia.
|
| The Diplomat - https://thediplomat.com/
|
| Probably the best foreign policy magazine in the APAC region.
| Well researched and a diverse amount of voices from all sides
| of the political spectrum
|
| Lowy Institute - https://www.lowyinstitute.org/
|
| Probably the best APAC foreign policy think tank. It's
| essentially Brookings Level
| dumty37 wrote:
| hef19898 wrote:
| So, the right leaning newspapaer? I think OPs list pretty
| well ballanced and great source for non-Indians to learn
| about politics in India.
| alephnerd wrote:
| The Print tends to lean more AAP or Shanta Kumar style
| BJP than Modi style BJP, Congress, etc. This is a
| reflection of politics and biases in the
| Delhi/Haryana/Punjab/HP/JK/Ladakh/Uttarakhand region in
| general.
|
| There are different political dynamics there than - say -
| in Purvanchal/Bihar, Kutch/Western Rajasthan, Eastern
| Jharkhand/Western West Bengal, etc. My hunch is most
| Indian posters on here are probably going to be techie
| posters who grew up in ethnolinguistically mixed (mix of
| Indo-European and Dravidian speakers) Southern India
| cities like Bangalore or Hyderabad.
|
| Also, both the posters you are responding to are trolls.
| Please don't feed 'em!
| screye wrote:
| Caveats:
|
| The Indian center is very different from the American
| center. Economically, the Indian center is closer to
| Bernie-Sanders than it is to Biden. The Indian left
| (academic and on the ground) is actually communist and the
| Indian right still tends to be fairly center-left (as far
| as the US goes) The social left-right dimension is its own
| thing, and does not map neatly onto similar intuitions in
| the west.
|
| The last caveat is that Indian secularism is very different
| from western secularism.
|
| _________
|
| That being said, This is a good list.
|
| > The Print
|
| I am personally biased towards favoring 'The Print' more so
| than the other organizations. Shekhar Gupta leads an
| ideologically clear (socially liberal, economically
| liberal) media house, always quotes their sources and does
| well to separate reporting from opinion. I would not call
| it right leaning by any means.
|
| > Caravan
|
| I have mixed opinions on Caravan. At their best, they are
| great. But, they can vary between excellent left-leaning
| journalism to outright left-wing fear mongering. I'm sure
| you'll see some strong opinions thrown around about them,
| and both the positive and negative tend to be well
| deserved.
|
| > Wire and OutlookIndia
|
| I have a low opinion of both. I wouldn't go as far as to
| call them a rag, but I wouldn't defend them against those
| accusations either.
|
| > Swarajya - but a strong source to understand BJP and
| Hinduvta politics from their perspective
|
| Agreed. Won't go there for news, but serves a purpose.
| alephnerd wrote:
| Glad you added that caveat to this thread!
|
| A lot of Western commentators don't tend to realize that
| aspect of Indian politics, instead applying a federal
| American lens (though American politics is actually
| equally diverse as well).
|
| To any Americans reading this thread, Indian politics is
| HEAVILY local party driven. BJP MPs from states like HP
| would have entirely different opinions or backgrounds
| from BJP MPs from a region like Purvanchal (Eastern UP).
| In additional, most elected officials in Indian politics
| don't really have party loyalty. They'll change parties
| at the drop of the hat (or start their own) if they feel
| their opportunity to climb up the political rungs are
| best served elsewhere. That is a MASSIVE reason the
| BJP/NDA+ won like a steamroller in 2019 - a number of up
| and coming INC politicians changed party affiliations
| because their upward potential was blocked by regional
| INC machines.
|
| In addition, it is very common for regional political
| barons to split off from the national party and make
| their own regional party - this happened with the INC in
| West Bengal (Mamata Banerjee and the TMC), Uttar Pradesh
| (Mulayam Singh Yadav and the Samajwadi Party),
| Maharashtra (Bal Thackeray and the Shiv Sena - which
| itself split into 2 parties this week - and Tariq Anwar
| and the NCP) , and Andhra Pradesh (YSR Raja Reddy and the
| YSR Congress) to name a few states. Captain Amarinder
| Singh - the former Chief Minister (Indian equivalent of
| Governor) of Punjab - himself is rumored to be making a
| regional party in Punjab now as well after internal
| politicking in the INC forced him out of CMship.
|
| That said, similar stuff will eventually happen to the
| BJP as well. I've heard rumblings at the grassroots level
| in Haryana, HP, and Jammu about discontent with local BJP
| acolytes and there is probably going to be a major shift
| in Indian politics over the next 10 years as a new
| generation of local parties form.
|
| ==========================
|
| > The Print
|
| Agree with you that they are not right leaning in any
| way. I labelled them as slightly center right due to
| their occasional support for certain pro-market reforms
| (ones that I do support by the way). Honestly, I probably
| could have called them centrist but the edit timer has
| run down on that comment.
|
| > Wire and Outlook
|
| I'm curious about your reasons for having a low opinion
| of them? I've had reservations about some opinions the
| Wire reports, but at least in the region my family is
| from they've been pretty even handed reporting on abuses
| of power that have occurred. W/ regards to Outlook I was
| debating whether to add them to this list, but I have
| read some quality articles from them on occasion.
| screye wrote:
| This is golden. It's nice to see people add context to
| Indian politics on HN. All too often, even the most well-
| read American has a naive understanding of Indian
| politics. You're doing God's work giving folks glimpses
| into the sheer difference, complexity and nuance of
| Indian politics.
|
| > but the edit timer has run down on that comment
|
| such is life.
|
| > I'm curious about your reasons for having a low opinion
| of them?
|
| I think part of it is because I only ever read them when
| someone tells me about how they mis-reported on
| something. So, it might be personal bias where I overtly
| hone-in on the mistakes they make. I don't read either
| OutlookIndia or TheWire enough to make strong claims
| about their caliber as journalism houses. But when I get
| linked to them, I make sure to get a 2nd opinion.
| himalayan wrote:
| hef19898 wrote:
| So, the anti-semite anti-Soros propaganda has reached
| India now?
| alephnerd wrote:
| Kinda. A lot of Indian internet commentators tend to
| resort to antisemitic tropes without realizing the
| implications, due to a lack of awareness and a bit of
| cargo culting American political discourse on reddit or
| 4chan.
|
| There is a regional bias to all of this discourse of
| course and it could be an upper level social sciences
| course unto itself.
| anuraj wrote:
| While that is true on rhetoric - on practice it is not. While
| 60% of bills went through parliamentary scrutiny prior to 2014
| - the number today is just above 10%. Also Modi has the
| distinction of passing maximum bills without debate and
| bypassing the state senate altogether.
| dumty37 wrote:
| Might well have the distinction of withdrawing bills without
| debate a la Farm bill.
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| In a parliamentary democracy, if the elected party in power
| has a majority, they can do what you're describing.
| portpecos wrote:
| In a presidential democracy, if the Senate and House of
| Representatives is majority Democrats, then yes, the
| Democrats can do the same. Obama once had majority in House
| of Reps and Senate as well.
|
| There is one thing that is different. The Filibuster is
| very powerful in the US. I'm not so sure the filibuster is
| a powerful tool in UK's parliament and India's Parliament.
| valarauko wrote:
| > There is one thing that is different. The Filibuster is
| very powerful in the US. I'm not so sure the filibuster
| is a powerful tool in UK's parliament and India's
| Parliament.
|
| The filibuster isn't a thing in the Indian system, but
| even in the US it can be broken by a super majority -
| which the governing alliance in India does have. Besides,
| the filibuster has rarely been used in recent times -
| more often than not, it's simply the threat of one.
| TheArcane wrote:
| A sad consequence of one political party having a majority in
| the parliament. Modi supporters tout it as a harbinger of
| efficiency bill passing when in reality it's just eroded
| democracy.
| woweoe wrote:
| Having a majority in parliament is the normal way of doing
| things
| ngcc_hk wrote:
| Majority rule and minority rights are democracy.
| Otherwise once vote in everyone is save ... might as well
| no democracy.
| simiones wrote:
| To be fair, in many parliamentary systems it is very
| unusual for any one party to have an absolute majority.
| In most such systems, the winning party of an election
| often only wins a plurality of votes, and has to woo
| other parties to govern - either through a coalition or
| just a minority government.
| woweoe wrote:
| India does not have a single party majority either but an
| alliance majority
| valarauko wrote:
| The BJP by itself has a simple majority in the Lok Sabha,
| and makes up over 87% of the NDA's members in the Lok
| Sabha.
| portpecos wrote:
| In 2009, Congress Party made up 78% of the UPA's members
| in the Lok Sabha.
| valarauko wrote:
| Sure, though the UPA was still short of even a simple
| majority in the Lok Sabha, and was held up by outside
| support from the Left Front. The BJP's simple majority in
| the Lok Sabha from 2013 onwards is the first time any
| single party has held a majority since the 80s.
| blueblisters wrote:
| A majority in a parliamentary system still allows some
| room for debate and dissent since MPs are, in principle,
| representatives of their constituency and not of the
| party. However, in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote
| against the party line - that is grounds for their
| disqualification - due to the anti-defection law. Any
| debate is pure theatrics at this point and the party
| leadership is free to pass any law they want.
| happyopossum wrote:
| > in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the
| party line
|
| Inn what way is this a functioning parliamentary system
| then?
| valarauko wrote:
| It's not a perfect system, but the provisions of the
| Anti-Defection Law tried to address what was a bigger
| issue in Indian politics - legislators changing sides for
| what turned out to be enormous sums of (undisclosed)
| money. In this climate, the incumbent party could bribe
| opposition members to prop up the government, and
| attempts to poach new legislators right after the
| elections reached ridiculous levels.
|
| For what it's worth, while this does hinder a legislator
| from voting as per the will of their constituents even
| where they are at odds with the party line, within the
| Indian political system there are so many special
| interest parties that differ from each other in minor
| details of policy. In theory, the will of constituents
| could have been made manifest by voting for the policy
| adjacent party instead.
|
| Again, it's not a perfect system, but it's attempting to
| fix the obvious issues that arose in India.
| portpecos wrote:
| > In what way is this a functioning parliamentary system
| then?
|
| You can ask other parliamentary systems the same
| questions. For example, the Australian Labor Party
| requires its members to pledge their support for the
| collective ui decisions of the caucus, which prohibits
| them from "crossing the floor" as well.
|
| Just as importantly, the Anti-"Crossing the Floor" law
| was passed in 1985 by the Congress Party under the
| leadership of Rajiv Gandhi (Son of Indira Gandhi, Husband
| of Sonia Gandhi, and Father of Rahul Gandhi). India's
| been functioning under that system for almost 40 years,
| and I doubt Rahul Gandhi and Congress Party will repeal
| that law when they come back into party. That's because
| it's their law. They wrote it.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Do Indian MPs explicitly pledge to toe the party line?
| valarauko wrote:
| Explicitly? No. At no point does a member sworn in as an
| MP have to then swear to affirm their party affiliation.
| In practice, however, the Anti-Defection Law deems
| anybody voting against the will of the party to have
| vacated their membership of the party, which can then be
| pursued to strip them of membership of the house.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Is it normal for MPs to speak out against the party line
| even while voting it?
| valarauko wrote:
| Not at all. It's highly unusual for a politician to speak
| against the party line on a bill, if at all. The only
| time we ever see fracturing, if any, is around the
| elections, where dissatisfied members may break away or
| switch parties. It's not uncommon for people to switch
| allegiances if they were refused an election ticket as
| the party candidate, or for higher level politicians to
| form break away factions if refused the Chief Ministerial
| position, for example. The Anti-Defection Law allows
| breakaway factions only if at least 1/3rd leave en masse.
| darth_avocado wrote:
| > in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the
| party line
|
| That is not true at all. Anti-defection law is applied
| when elected officials run on a party and once elected
| decide to change their party affiliation. Not for
| individual bills.
| ridiculous_leke wrote:
| It's not illegal. But that ensures their eviction from
| the party and can potentially destroy their political
| career.
| valarauko wrote:
| The Anti-Defection Law can very much be applied if a
| legislator votes against a party whip, even for a bill.
| There are calls to limit its applicability only to votes
| on the government, but that is currently not the case.
|
| Quoting from PRSIndia [1]:
|
| _Does the anti-defection law affect the ability of
| legislators to make decisions?_
|
| _The anti-defection law seeks to provide a stable
| government by ensuring the legislators do not switch
| sides. However, this law also restricts a legislator from
| voting in line with his conscience, judgement and
| interests of his electorate. Such a situation impedes the
| oversight function of the legislature over the
| government, by ensuring that members vote based on the
| decisions taken by the party leadership, and not what
| their constituents would like them to vote for._
|
| _Political parties issue a direction to MPs on how to
| vote on most issues, irrespective of the nature of the
| issue. Several experts have suggested that the law should
| be valid only for those votes that determine the
| stability of the government (passage of the annual budget
| or no-confidence motions)._
|
| [1]: [The Anti-Defection Law
| Explained](https://prsindia.org/theprsblog/the-anti-
| defection-law-expla...)
| [deleted]
| rajup wrote:
| Unless you support the minority party in which case
| democracy is definitely not working and/or the voters for
| the majority party are deluded ;)
| ridiculous_leke wrote:
| How did it erode democracy?
| jitix wrote:
| Many countries operate like this. It's the downside of
| having a parliamentary system (which IMO is better than a
| presidential one). Greece and Japan are good examples.
| Canada to a certain extent too in the past (with the LPC).
|
| Also for a good chunk of its history, India has been run on
| super majorities as pointed out in this comment:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32346371
| tw600040 wrote:
| So, when majority of the people support one political party
| that's called eroding democracy?
| dustypotato wrote:
| Wow. Do you have the source for the numbers? It's very
| surprising
| portpecos wrote:
| I also need clarification on what he means by Modi
| bypassing parliament to pass his own bills. That's not how
| a parliamentary system works. Imagine Tony Blair bypassing
| the House of Lords and the House of Commons to pass his own
| bill. Or Obama bypassing the Senate and House of
| Representatives to pass his own bill. It's a very strange
| claim to me.
| valarauko wrote:
| Not GGP, but I assume they mean that bills were passed
| through parliament without any real debate or amendments,
| since the governing party holds a super majority.
| portpecos wrote:
| The UK has done the same when having a party majority in
| the House of Lords and House of Commons.
|
| In the US things are different. Even if there is a party
| majority in the Senate and House, the Filibuster is
| powerful enough to table the party majority's bills.
| valarauko wrote:
| Unfortunately, the way things proceed in India tend to be
| more crass - where the opposition often tries to
| physically prevent the tabling of controversial bills.
| We've had occasions where members grabbed papers off the
| Speaker's desk, and members routinely try to block
| proceedings by entering the well of the House and
| sloganeering. This leads to the Speaker adjourning the
| session and/or the opposition staging a walkout during
| the actual vote. It's not uncommon to see parliamentary
| sessions with only the treasury benches full for the
| vote.
| portpecos wrote:
| Maybe India takes inspiration from her colonizers?
|
| "How did the British Parliament become a place where the
| person speaking is constantly interrupted while the US
| Congress is one where the audience is quiet?"
|
| Answer: "It didn't become such a place, it always was
| such a place. It started life as a collection of people
| sent by various towns to meet the King to petition him
| for some action or other. It was a totally formless group
| of individuals admitted to the King's larger meeting hall
| when and if the King permitted. As such they would shout
| over each other in the attempt to get the King's
| attention. Over the centuries it became more formalised
| and more structured, and a modicum of order imposed. But
| it has always had the character of a rowdy everybody
| against everybody discussion rather than an academic
| debate.
|
| Famous Parliamentarians, particularly Winston Churchill,
| have enjoyed it being so and encouraged it. The width of
| the gangway is still two swords lengths, so they cannot
| engage swords across it, and the cloak rooms outside
| still have ribbons intended for you to hang your sword
| before entering the chamber. Parliament values its
| traditions of being a barely orderly town meeting."
|
| I don't know how accurate that answer is, but it was the
| top comment in quora. Other sites show similar answers.
| valarauko wrote:
| Makes sense that it's the system we inherited. For what
| it's worth, I'd rather have my representatives voice
| dissent loudly rather than compliance. I wish that
| dissent was channelled productively rather than show for
| the TV cameras, but alas, that's what we've got. I do
| think it's a superior system to the two party US system,
| especially for such a large and diverse nation like
| India. It desperately needs reform, though.
| HaloZero wrote:
| I thought Modi's party only had a super majority in the
| lower house though, don't they need both houses?
| valarauko wrote:
| The party holds a simple majority (~ 55%) in the Lower
| House, while the alliance holds a near super majority (~
| 63%) - the Indian system holds a super majority at 2/3rds
| of each house present and voting, not the total
| membership of the house.
|
| The alliance does not hold the upper house, though they
| have a near simple majority.
| portpecos wrote:
| 1984: Rajiv Gandhi's Congress Party got a super majority
| (77%)
|
| 1980: Indira Gandhi's Congress Party got a super majority
| (65%)
|
| 1977: Indira Gandhi's Congress Party got a majority (56%)
|
| 1971: Indira Gandhi's Congress Party got a super majority
| (68%)
|
| 1967: Indira Gandhi's Congress Party got a majority (55%)
|
| 1962: Nehru's Congress Party at 73%
|
| 1957: Nehru's Congress Party at 75%
|
| 1952: Nehru's Congress Party at 74%
|
| If the complaint is, "Supermajorities aren't a
| Democracy", then it must be agreed upon that India hasn't
| been been a Democracy under the Congress Party for 32
| years out of the 75 years of independence.
| valarauko wrote:
| > If the complaint is, "Supermajorities aren't a
| Democracy"
|
| Is anybody actually saying that? For what its worth, I do
| think super majorities are corrosive long term for the
| multiparty Westminster style parliamentary systems. There
| is little incentive for compromise building or genuine
| debate on bills. It might even work if political parties
| had visible internal debate and discussion, and we can
| largely agree that this is not a thing in Indian
| political parties.
| dhruval wrote:
| The original claim was that the senate was bypassed (non-
| democratic).
|
| A majority in the Senate is democratic if democratically
| elected etc.
|
| Whereas increasing the power of the executive as is the
| trend in the USA by bypassing the house / Senate is
| corrosive to democracy in my view.
| valarauko wrote:
| _The original claim was that the senate was bypassed
| (non-democratic)._
|
| _A majority in the Senate is democratic if
| democratically elected etc._
|
| I'm not sure what this means - that the NDA government
| could bypass the Rajya Sabha for 90% (the number quoted
| in the original claim) of bills? That doesn't make sense.
| I don't see how that is even possible.
|
| The only way that the Rajya Sabha can be effectively
| bypassed is by the Lok Sabha speaker certifying a bill as
| a Money Bill (famously, the Aadhaar Bill was a Money
| Bill). In that case the objections raised by the Rajya
| Sabha are non-binding on the Lok Sabha and can be
| rejected by the lower house, and is deemed to have passed
| after 14 days. I do not think that 90% of bills
| introduced by the Modi government were Money Bills. So
| how does the claim of 90% work?
| portpecos wrote:
| I think anuraj edited his comment. He originally said,
| "Modi bypasses parliament to pass his own bills." So our
| debates are starting to lose context.
| valarauko wrote:
| I see.
| naruvimama wrote:
| neeleshs wrote:
| >>Also Modi has the distinction of passing maximum bills
| without debate and bypassing the state senate altogether
|
| I think this comment can be interpreted that way to some
| extent. Reads like one person has the power to bypass an
| entire legislative house. That's not the reality though.
|
| I do agree with you that having supermajority for a long
| time is not a good thing. Unfortunately for India, that's
| how it has been historically (Congress for long periods
| of time and now it looks like BJP)
| [deleted]
| oaiey wrote:
| I do not understand why legislator of a non-US country is not
| instantly copying GDPR. It has solid spread already and the rules
| are adequately balancing customers, law and company interests
| (yes, that does not look like but hey, advertisement is still
| possible). International collaboration is much easier like that.
|
| GDPR has this very fancy article saying: This all applies, except
| a law says otherwise. As a government, this is then up to you how
| many laws you create for your own surveillance and other state
| apparatus. Citizens get a nice benefit. Big companies anyway need
| to adhere to GDPR one way or the other due to the international
| market. Local companies which want to collect citizens data
| should get their users consent. That is not so hard. Even data
| privacy paranoid Germany has a private credit rating system which
| works for 50+ years.
|
| There is no other reason except corruption/lobbyism which would
| require a legislator to vote against a GDPR like approach. There
| is no risk to your economy by introducing good data privacy.
|
| Just a rant. India might have its reasons.
| randomperson_24 wrote:
| India doesn't have enough purchasing power to convince big tech
| companies (Google, Facebook, etc.) to store the data of Indian
| residents in India. Also, there are not many local tech
| monoliths with consumer apps to fall back on (like China had).
|
| Since India depends heavily on apps & services by big tech, I
| doubt such requirements like GDPR has would be enforced.
| Although the right to ask a website to delete all information
| about one and so on are quite good and could work.
| lbriner wrote:
| Because there will be people for whom any changes would
| massively affect their ability to do their work/business who
| would not simply accept something as comprehensive as GDPR.
|
| As the OP article says, even if not perfect, why not start here
| and make amendments later to tighten things up i.e. something
| is better than nothing. The real problem is that legislation is
| glacially slow and expensive to put into law which is good (to
| stop kneejerk laws) but also bad since it doesn't allow you to
| pass the 90% that is probably agreed and worry about the sticky
| bits later.
| girishso wrote:
| Government withdrew the bill only to bring it back in a new form,
| since the original bill had something like 80 amendments.
| klors wrote:
| BRICS countries are going to continue the social credit/aadhar
| route and the West will watch jealously.
|
| This is nothing against China/India etc., I'm sure their
| populations do not like the direction either.
| eklavya wrote:
| How is social credit in PRC in any shape of form comparable to
| AADHAR (SSN in US)?
| dane-pgp wrote:
| "India's dodgy mass surveillance project should concern us
| all"
|
| "Biometric ID card project Aadhaar links almost every part of
| a citizen's personal life to a state database"
|
| https://www.wired.co.uk/article/india-aadhaar-biometrics-
| pri...
| cuteboy19 wrote:
| It's just a biometric Id system. Europe has one too, its
| actually very similar to aadhar in scope and usage. In fact
| the stated reasoning is identical to that of aadhar.
|
| https://blog.hidglobal.com/2021/09/european-union-already-
| ro...
|
| Though I doubt wired.com would do an article about the
| draconian European "mass surveillance database".
| ksquarekumar wrote:
| pvsukale3 wrote:
| Related:
|
| If you want to read policy research on Indian goverment PRS
| research is a good resource. They usually analyse new bills and
| amendments in Indian parliament.
|
| https://prsindia.org/
| alephnerd wrote:
| +1 on this. I'm surprised I've never come across this before.
| Their annual reviews are on point.
| marioexpert wrote:
| nindalf wrote:
| I'm always on board for criticism of any ruling government,
| Modi included. But in this case, it seems like OP is wrong.
| They're coming up with a replacement bill. It won't be GDPR,
| but it'll be something.
| pmg1991 wrote:
| Wow user of this comment is just 3 minutes older than the
| comment,
| the_common_man wrote:
| Can you elaborate more? Why is he dangerous to humanity?
| sofixa wrote:
| 1sembiyan wrote:
| Not more dangerous to fellow humans than other kinds of
| world leaders, surely? America, without nationalist
| populists at the helm these past two decades, was clearly
| dangerous to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq (unless
| they are not part of humanity).
|
| Self-serving politicians are the rule across the world, not
| exceptions. The best we can hope for is one person is not
| in power for too long.
| cdot2 wrote:
| I'm not all that worried about the safety of the Taliban
| or ISIS
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Isolationist world leaders have historically been
| dangerous for humanity! /s
| sofixa wrote:
| InCityDreams wrote:
| I wholeheartedly agree, except >There's nothing wrong in
| being proud with your country,
|
| Carlin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOmQP9guIl0
| guesswho_ wrote:
| sofixa wrote:
| I like how I basically trashed all US politicians and
| policies, their whole way of political life and you
| assumed I'm American. I'm not.
|
| And for the record, the US isn't bombing Yemen, Saudi
| Arabia and the UAE are, with US, British, French and
| other weapons. Get your war crimes right. Complicity by
| selling weapons for war crimes, and actually committing
| war crimes, are not the same thing.
| yiamvino wrote:
| ksquarekumar wrote:
| dev080913 wrote:
| yalogin wrote:
| On the spectrum of privacy india is on the furthest end of it. No
| one cares about privacy and actively give their data over to
| everyone. For example every vendor asks for your phone number and
| people don't question it at all.
|
| As great as the privacy law sounds I have a suspicion that it
| will just be used by police and the government to abuse authority
| and silence critics like they do with people tweeting anything
| the government doesn't like. Hope I am wrong
| cuteboy19 wrote:
| Wasn't this always the case? There were once huge "phone-books"
| containing all phone numbers in an area mapped to people's
| names. This is not much different from giving out emails
| anshumankmr wrote:
| >New Delhi [India], August 4 (ANI): Union Electronics and
| Information Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on Thursday
| explained the reason behind withdrawing the Personal Data
| Protection Bill, 2019, asserting that the aim is to bring new
| compressive legislation at par with technology landscape which is
| changing rapidly.
|
| He further said that the Joint Committee of Parliament
| recommended 81 amendments in a Bill that was of 99 sections which
| practically, suggested for overhauling the Bill.
|
| The government on Wednesday withdrew the Personal Data Protection
| Bill, 2019 and has decided to come up with new legislation in
| view of a large number of amendments suggested by the Joint
| Committee of Parliament towards a comprehensive legal framework
| on the digital ecosystem.
|
| Speaking to ANI, the Union Minister said, the Joint Parliamentary
| Committee recommended major changes in the Bill, which was like
| rewriting the entire Bill.
|
| "The Joint Parliamentary Committee did very extensive work. They
| consulted a very large number of stakeholders. After it, the
| Joint Committee of Parliament gave a very comprehensive report
| which recommended 81 amendments in a Bill that was of 99
| sections, it was practically rewriting the entire bill. Apart
| from the amendments, they were some 12 major suggestions were
| there from the committee," said Vaishnaw.
|
| He said that it was important to withdraw the old Bill to come up
| with a contemporary and modern legal framework to tackle the
| challenges of coping with the rapidly changing technology.
|
| https://theprint.in/india/personal-data-protection-bill-with...
|
| Let's see what happens. Personally, most people really don't
| cares about their data privacy, it only really became a talking
| point when TikTok started gaining dominance in India cause China
| is a geopolitical and millitary threat. I don't have any real
| hopes of them enacting something close to the GDPR ever.
| Kukumber wrote:
| You can guess how sovereign a country is by how they protect
| their own people, and how much effort they put into it (or rather
| their lack of motivation)
|
| To me this looks like their government have different interests
| to protect, than protecting their own people
|
| Not a great outlook for the future of India, in a world where
| tech will be even more predominant and cyberwarfare will pose
| serious threat to democracy
|
| They are at the mercy of the american tech giants, maybe they
| lobby over there? I wouldn't be surprised since both Google and
| Microsoft are present over there
| mynameismon wrote:
| > _To me this looks like their government have different
| interests to protect, than protecting their own people_
|
| Where did you derive this from? They are not scrapping the bill
| in its entirety, rather, they are bringing out a replacement
| bill.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-04 23:01 UTC)