Cross-border data transfers: (In)Adequate protection? - The Daily Guardian
Connect with us

Policy & Politics

Cross-border data transfers: (In)Adequate protection?

Rahul Chaudhary, Jayashree Parihar & Aastha Saxena

Published

on

“Data is the New Oil, the New Gold”. If there is one thing which unites businesses all over the world, it is, above all else, their collection, use, processing or storage of personal/financial data of clients, consumers, service providers and business associates.

 Across the nations , data protection laws have changed remarkably over the past two decades. Now more than ever, an individual’s digital existence is a common phenomenon. Our reliance on smartphones, laptops and wearable technology has increased manifold and payment through online digital modes, is a way of life. At an individual level, there is a huge amount of personal data that is being shared, collected, and stored online on the pretext of making our online existence customized and therefore, comfortable. Due to this boom in digital space and economy, one of the most frequent concerns to arise is regarding the ‘adequacy’ of protection of our personal data.

Generally speaking, personal data is any data or set of data which can be used to identify a person directly or indirectly. This would include one’s name, characteristics, personality traits, appearance etc. which may not necessarily be closely guarded. However, certain other types of data, such as those relating to one’s religious or political belief, health, or private life would be closely guarded as their dissemination, or knowledge could have significant impact on a person or may be treated with greater care simply by virtue of their sensitive nature. With varying legal systems and societal standards, all jurisdictions have their own definition of what type of data should be categorised as ‘Sensitive Personal Data’ or be put in a special category of personal data (‘SPD’) requiring a relatively higher level of regulation or protection.

In the digital economy space businesses are global, requiring cross-border transfer of personal data. It is imperative that each business must understand the common basic principles pertaining to data protection and privacy laws regulating the legal environment of the jurisdictions within which such business operates or transacts. At a high level, jurisdictions having dedicated data protection law usually permit crossborder transfer of personal data on five broad principles – adequacy, informed consent, contractual necessity, interests of data subjects or other persons, and overriding legal or state functions.

The principle of adequacy requires that data can be transferred across national borders only if the receiving nation or territory offers sufficient protection for data under its own laws, which is comparable to or, at the very least complies with the minimum protection accorded in the transferor state.

The last few weeks have been particularly busy for the data protection activists and businesses alike, as both find themselves grappling with the issues resurrected by the ruling of the Court of Justice of European Union (‘CJEU’), European Union’s highest court, in the much-awaited case of Data Protection Commissioner v. Facebook Ireland Limited, Maximillian Schrems (usually known as the ‘Schrems II’) wherein the legal basis of international transfer and processing of personal data between the EU and the United States of America (‘USA’) was tested for the second time.

European privacy laws [previously the Data Protection Directive – Directive 95/46/EC (‘Directive’), and now the General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’)] permit free flow of personal data within the EU. Cross-border transfer of personal data to non-EU country is also permitted provided the personal data enjoys ‘adequate’ level of protection in such country which is essentially ‘equivalent’ to that within the EU. USA came up with a set of guidelines or principles to be followed by businesses receiving data from EU known as the EU-US Safe Harbour framework (‘Safe Harbour framework’). Vide order dated July 26, 2000, the European Commission accepted the adequacy of Safe Harbour framework. This resulted in free flow of personal data from EU to USA provided the entity receiving the personal data was compliant with the privacy principles contained in Safe Harbour framework.

 In 2013, Edward Snowden publicly disclosed that intelligence agencies in USA have wide access to the personal data of EU users being collected by the electronic communication/service providers in USA. Following these revelations regarding the invasive surveillance mechanisms employed by authorities in USA, questions were raised about the integrity of the Safe Harbour framework and the adequacy of protection provided by it.

In the year 2015 an Austrian national, ‘Maximillian Schrems’ approached the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (‘DPC’) claiming that the Safe Harbour framework did not guarantee the requisite level of data protection mandated under the Data Protection Directive, the EU’s data protection law in force at the time, and thus, data collected by Facebook Ireland Limited from EU residents must not be transferred to servers of Facebook Inc. in USA, as it violated the guaranteed rights of EU residents. The DPC ruled that it was bound by the Order dated July 26, 2000 passed by the European Commissioner; the Safe Harbour framework provided adequate protection; and, rejected the complaint as “frivolous and vexatious”. The matter travelled up to the CJEU which gave its decision in this case of Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner, which came to famously be known as the ‘Schrems I’ case, in the year 2015. The CJEU also observed that “legislation permitting the public authorities to have access on a generalised basis to the content of electronic communications must be regarded as compromising the essence of the fundamental right to respect for private life” as guaranteed under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘CFR’). The CJEU held that a third country such as the USA must provide an “essentially equivalent” level of protection, that the decision of the DPC was invalid and that the protection pursuant to the Safe Harbour framework was inadequate.

Soon thereafter, USA negotiated with EU to come up with another framework referred to as the EU-US Privacy Shield framework (‘Privacy Shield’) for providing adequate protection to data so that the companies in the USA can resume engaging in crossborder transfer of data on a self-certification basis. European Commission’s Decision 2016/1250/EC of July 12, 2016 approved the Privacy Shield as providing ‘adequate’/’equivalent’ protection.

Since the Privacy Shield had failed to address the core issues pertaining to conflict of laws in USA with the fundamental right to respect for private life as guaranteed under the CFR of EU, the issue related to adequacy of protection granted by the Privacy Shield again travelled to the CJEU on account of a lawsuit filed by Irish DPC against Facebook Ireland Limited and Maximillian Schrems. However, this time, the touchstone to judge the adequacy of the data protection was GDPR which replaced and repealed the Directive in the year 2018. On July 16, 2020, the CJEU issued a judgment declaring invalid the European Commission’s Decision of July 12, 2016 on the adequacy of the Privacy Shield. The CJEU, amongst other things, declared the Privacy Shield as an invalid mechanism for transferring personal data, due to the limitations on its protection from the domestic law of USA which allow indiscriminate access to public authorities in USA to the EU data transferred there. It observed that though the Commission had held in its adequacy ruling that the authorities in USA would be bound by the limitation principles under the EU law, the laws of USA do not “grant data subjects actionable rights before the courts against the US authorities. Therefore, the Privacy Shield cannot ensure a level of protection essentially equivalent to that arising from the Charter contrary to the requirement in Article 45(2)(a) of the GDPR that a finding of equivalence depends, inter alia, on whether data subjects whose personal data are being transferred to the third country in question have effective and enforceable rights.” The CJEU thereby declared that the Privacy Shield cannot be used as the legal basis for transferring personal data to USA where the recipient is subject to parting with such data as per its surveillance laws.

Back at home, the Supreme Court of India in the year 2018 had also given a ruling recognising the need to bridle the powers of the government while handling data of its citizens. It was noted that “informational privacy is a facet of the right to privacy. The dangers to privacy in an age of information can originate not only from the state but from non-state actors as well.” To guard against such dangers, the Court recognised that “a careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legitimate concerns of the state” needs to be achieved. In the past couple of months, lack of adequate protection has also been a growing concern. The Indian Government’s recent ban on several Chinese applications including TikTok, UC Browser and BeautyPlus was also due to breach of users’ data privacy. India under its current laws in the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011 also recognises the requirement of adequate protection for cross-border transfer of SPD.

Should adequacy be lacking in laws, states such as Russia, Switzerland and those following the GDPR permit cross-border transfers provided treaties or data sharing frameworks have been established for it. It was under this route that the Privacy Shield was set up to allow EU companies to transact with businesses in USA. Even if there is no data sharing framework in place, entities intending to transfer the data can opt to be contractually bound by the model clauses or Standard Contractual Clauses (‘SCC’) approved by the transferor nation’s data authorities. Even otherwise, parties can themselves provide contractual obligations respecting the higher protection standards. However, some jurisdictions such as Switzerland, would require prior approval of the data protection authorities if the SCCs terms are deviated from. The consequences of the CJEU judgment in Schrems II is that the businesses are now forced to rely on SCCs to legally support cross-border transfer of personal data from EU to USA. Contractual safeguards may even be put in place by way of binding corporate policies. The law proposed to be enforced soon in India i.e. the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 (‘Proposed Bill’) also envisages alternative mechanisms to facilitate cross-border transfer of data.

Even in case of glaring conflicts or inadequacy, all is not lost in the world of data transfer. In such situations, cross-border transfer can take place if the data subject or data principal, i.e. the person to whom this personal data relates, consents to transferring such data despite being apprised of the risks associated with such inadequacy. What assumes importance then is the quality of consent and the riders attached to it, which vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. For instance, EU, UK, Mauritius and Switzerland would require that consent should be given after informing the data subject about associated risks and giving the option to refuse such consent. In fact, in Vietnam, financial data is considered as SPD and therefore, the e-commerce websites must seek purpose-specific informed consent before using or disclosing such data. On the other hand, as per Australian law, since financial data is not strictly included in SPD, it could even be disclosed based on an implied consent understood to have been given by the data subject. However, most recently enacted data protection laws do not consider a ‘consent by default’ sufficient for this purpose. The practicality of this is to give the data subject an opportunity to make a conscious decision for herself, being insulated from the self-interest of the data controller/transferor to export data, whether for ease of business or earning profits.

Where transfer is necessary for purpose of contractual or pre-contractual obligations, the same may be transferred in the absence of specific informed consent for cross-border transfer by the data subject. However, the requisite parties to the contract eligible to transfer data in this manner also vary under different laws. In countries such as Brazil, Mauritius and Russia, so long as it is in the best interest of the data subject, even contracts entered into by the data collector/transferor with other third parties to the exclusion of but for benefit of the data subject would be valid ground for availing leeway under this basis. Whereas in Switzerland, for intra-group cross-border transfer in case of inadequacy, data subject should be a party to the contract.

The next basis for international transfer is vital or compelling interest. This means that cross-border transfer may be permitted on the grounds of vital interest of data subject, or on account of compelling legitimate interests of the data controller and/or processor, and in some cases, a third party. Different legislative frameworks have different standards for exercising this basis for cross-border transfer. In some jurisdictions, such as Germany, Russia and Luxembourg, such a ground of data subject’s interest would be permitted only where data subject is not in a position to give an informed consent. Interestingly, Mauritian authorities can even call upon the data exporter to demonstrate that compelling legitimate interests did in fact exist. Further, under the GDPR and Mauritian law, data from publicly accessible records can be shared, in compliance with other conditions of the data protection law or where the requesting third party, can demonstrate a legitimate interest where access is regulated. It is likely that issues relating to demonstrability and compelling nature of such interest, being subjective elements, would require frequent intervention of data protection authorities and courts.

 The ground of necessity for legal or state related functions for data transfer is, perhaps, a ground as widely observed as that of consent. Laws of almost all nations recognise that data to at least a limited extent could be transferred even without strictly complying with otherwise applicable law where disclosure is necessitated by reasons of national security or defence, public interest, protection of life or health, complying with court procedure or establishing or enforcing legal rights. It must be appreciated that it is not only in case of national or international exigencies that cross-border flow of data occurs. In the present day and age where international cooperation has expanded in all spheres, be it to improve global health, fight terrorism or to catch economic offenders, countries are likely to share data proactively to achieve their goals. Such cooperation amongst countries has been seen in the past when Herve Falciani in 2008 fled to France with data of account holders who were hiding money from taxmen in the Swiss branch of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (H.S.B.C.) Bank, and details of those individuals were shared with India by the French authorities in 2011 and later, the Swiss authorities in 2019. Being bound by their respective national laws to some extent, even the authorities would be expected to exercise a degree of caution while disclosing such data.

The protection of personal data in cross-border transfers has gained enormous importance in recent times and would continue to be of vital interest to the businesses in times to come given the fact that data flows are bound to grow with more and more businesses going digital. Judgments of CJEU in Schrems I and Schrems II has served notice to businesses and nations alike that the right to privacy must be upheld and respected.

 India has proposed a new law for protection of personal data. In fact, the Indian Government is also considering regulating the processing and transfer of non-personal data to promote a healthy business environment. Earlier this year, the Indonesian President is reported to have signed a draft law on personal data protection, which leans towards the Indian Proposed Bill and defines general personal data and SPD in a similar fashion. Unlike the GDPR, the Indonesian bill includes personal financial data as a part of SPD and for cross-border transfer of personal data and adopts the mechanism of ‘adequacy’ of protection in the recipient states. Countries like China, Indonesia and Russia, that once banned cross-border data transfers, are now conscious of the need to open up the digital boundaries and harmonize themselves with the global pulse of data protection. Where Switzerland had a more stringent regulation in place, in light of its close geographical and economic ties with the EU, perhaps, it realized the need to introduce leniency and streamline its laws with that of its neighbours.

 However, a view may be taken that it is not sufficient for countries to merely align their data protection policies. As seen above, a state of real adequacy of protection cannot be attained unless national laws overriding data protection laws are also brought in sync with one another. In absence of coming up with robust crossborder data transfer mechanisms, nations and entities might soon realise that the principle of adequacy is turning into an unforeseen trade barrier. Since international harmonization across legal issues seem more like a utopian vision than a soon to be achieved reality, data importers and exporters would have to make up for the disconnect on their own, to whatever extent it is possible. Depending on a case to case basis, one approach could be to transfer data not only on one of the many aforementioned legal bases but rather to use a combination thereof so that even if one of the basis is held to be invalid, like the Privacy Shield in Schrems II, business is not thrown in a state of absolute frenzy and rather already has provisions for enabling stop-gap arrangements to be put in place.

 While countries can take time to decide whether or not to review their respective legislations, the business entities are forced to amend their policies and contracts to protect their businesses so that they earn ‘adequate’ profits while arranging to provide for ‘equivalent’ protection for cross-border flow personal data.

Adv. Rahul Chaudhary is Partner, PSL Advocates & Solicitors. Adv. Jayashree Parihar is Senior Associate & Adv. Aastha Saxena is Associate, PSL Advocates & Solicitors.

The Daily Guardian is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@thedailyguardian) and stay updated with the latest headlines.

For the latest news Download The Daily Guardian App.

Policy & Politics

MAKING IT HAPPEN: RESTORATION OF WASTELAND

Anil Swarup

Published

on

Aishwarya Raj joined the Indian Forest Service in 2017, and Parvati Division was his second posting after Kullu in the state of Himachal Pradesh. Having taken charge in January, 2021, the first task was to assess the ground situation in different areas of his jurisdiction. On one such field visit close to the confluence of the mighty Beas and Parvati rivers, he came across a tract of forest land dumped with garbage and infested with heavy weed overgrowth. This was also a cause of riverside pollution. His staff informed him that the space was being misused by anti-social elements both during day and night to bide their time. These elements were involved in substance abuse as well. There was a threat of encroachment in the near future. Wanting to do something about these challenges, Aishwarya wondered how the forest land could be reclaimed into something safe and how some funds could be sourced to carry out the execution of a plan that he had on his mind. In his previous posting too, he had worked on a 15 hectare wasteland project in Manali that was being developed into an ecotourism project which gave him the confidence to think in terms of a possible revamp here as well.

Interestingly, the Government of Himachal Pradesh, around the same time, declared its intention to set up ‘Swarnim Vatikas’ across the state as part of Himachal’s 50 years statehood celebration. Using this as an opportunity, it was decided to transform this 1 hectare of wasteland into an eco-friendly sprawling, green urban space for town dwellers and nature seekers alike. The green zone was christened as ‘Sangam Swarnim Vatika’ for it stood at the confluence of two mighty rivers. If someone visits the place today, the view is serene, with no evidence of a shabby dump yard that once held ground here. Instead, it has been replaced with a beautifully landscaped garden, with a variety of tree species, creepers, shrubs, herbs along the area, frequented by a variety of beautiful birds.

The first step was to clear the area of its waste pile, cactus and weeds. The enthusiastic forest guards organized the clean-up quite efficiently. The garbage of around 25 tippers was collected and disposed. The organic waste was turned into processing vermicompost in nearby nurseries. The quality of soil was checked by deep digging and it was found to be in fairly good condition for plant growth. After mixing with some fertile mountain soil and humus, the soil was readied.

Before planting, the second step was to ensure the protection of the 2.5 acre area from both grazing/biotic pressures and movement of anti-social elements. In part RCC fencing and inter-link chain fencing was carried out for the entire space. Additionally, CCTV cameras were also installed nearby for monitoring purpose.

Technology cam handy. Aishwarya’s I-pad (which he deployed at workplace to minimize paper use) was a huge help in designing the entire lay-out of the Swarnim Vatika. After spending sometime exploring and reading on the local ecology and plant suitability of the ecotone area (Riverine), species of trees, shrubs and ornamental ones were identified. These could be considered for plantation in the park.

In phase I, over 400 species of native varieties such as deodar, silver oak, horse-chestnut, jacaranda, golden shower, bougainvillea, rose, thuja, cycas, ribbon plant, gladiola, peach, apricot, plum and pomegranate, among others have been planted. More than 200 additional species will be planted by the coming monsoon season. Groves of some of these species have been created so that can be enjoyed by visitors in future.

For landscaping, it was decided to go the up-cycling way in three aspects. One, the discarded or used slates, a stone with which houses are made in the hills, from the neighboring settlement were up-cycled to create the walking trails. The local ‘Dhrub’ grass sprouting in between those slates within 2 months is a sight to behold. Two, only riverside stones were used to landscape and beautify the Vatika. In addition to being eco-friendly, they enhanced the natural riverside view. Three, signages regarding nature awareness and seating are being installed. For this purpose, driftwood, obtained during last monsoon, are being put to use.

Parvati Valley is a hugely popular tourist hotspot with a number of breathtaking destinations. The Vatika, however, was primarily created for the local people who actually didn’t have enough urban walking or recreational avenues. Interestingly, there have been a number of avian visitors at the park – including yellow-billed blue magpie, parakeets, Eurasian hoopoe, barn swallow and doves. There is a likelihood of further increase in the number of such visitors.

The local panchayats, Mahila Mandals as well as youth groups have been engaged in this effort to instill a sense of ownership amongst them. This will help sustain the effort of keeping this area clean and green.

Next up, an attempt is being made to identify more such degraded areas in Parvati jurisdiction that can be converted into green zones. With funds and local support in place, this initiative will help revamp such areas and enrich the environment. The Vatika is an example where the Forest Department under the visionary leadership of a young forest officer, Aishwarya Raj and his committed team demonstrated a win-win scenario of nature conservation and development. Such initiatives, though small and in remote locations, can inspire others to do the same as they attempt to restore the beauty of Mother Earth. It is also an effort to demonstrate that a combination of concern for nature and capability to take the stake holders along can help transform the landscape in many regions. There are indeed many parts of the country that require such interventions

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

WHEN WILL YOU CHANGE, WHEN WILL THE COUNTRY TRANSFORM?

Milkha Singh wished to see an Indian win Olympic gold medal in athletics.

Vijay Darda

Published

on

I salute and bow down to the legendary sprinter Milkha Singh who got the sobriquet of Flying Sikh. On his departure, two thoughts come to my mind. First, will we ever see a runner like him again? And the second, when will Milkha Singh’s unfulfilled dream be fulfilled? He had a dream, that one day an Indian will win an Olympic gold medal! I wonder whether true tribute can be paid with an unfulfilled dream!0

When Milkha Singh ran in the Commonwealth Games and set a record that remained unbroken for 40 years, he did not have the resources. He faced immense hardship. He didn’t have a good pair of shoes. The concept of nutritious food was totally unfamiliar then. He used to run barefoot during practice. Yet he excelled, all these difficulties notwithstanding. His wife Nirmal Kaur was the captain of the national volleyball team and son Jeev Milkha Singh is a professional golfer. Milkha Singh always regretted why no Indian could win a gold medal in the athletics section in the Olympics. This regret became his dream. He would always express it. Unfortunately, this dream could not be fulfilled during his lifetime. After his death, the country is invariably remembering his dream and his contribution to sports. The entire country including the President, Vice President and Prime Minister has paid tribute to him. I think the real way of paying tribute to him will be to fulfil the dream he saw all his life. The nation should remember the blisters on his feet when he ran barefoot so as to groom an entire generation of sportsmen. Like Milkha Singh, it was Dhyanchand’s dream too that India should become the world champion in hockey again.

Actually, to fulfil the dreams of Milkha Singh and Dhyanchand, we have to work together on many fronts. First of all, we have to understand that sports is not just a means of enhancing physical ability. Sports are directly related to our patriotism, our self-respect, our progress and our nation’s pride. Remember that when the tricolour flies high in the celebration of victory and when the tune of Jana Gana Mana is played, we are thrilled to the bone. Tears of joy flow from the eyes of the winner. It was the dream of Milkha Singh to celebrate victory in the Olympic arena and hold the tricolour high to the tune of Jana Gana Mana.

Of course, the atmosphere is changing now. Kiren Rijiju is a very competent minister. He wants that an environment of sports should be created in the country. Children who have abilities should get opportunities. It can be said that the government seems to be becoming conscious about sports; the government has started to think that it should spend on sports, but the atmosphere is still not so positive that we can produce another Milkha Singh again. If we really want to create and train a generation of players, we have to learn how children are spotted and groomed by China, Russia or Croatia. Today the players of these countries dominate the playground, and the commitment of the government there is the biggest reason. I remember, I was watching a World Cup match. When the Croatian football team won, their President Colinda Graber walked into the dressing room and hugged the sweaty players and kissed them. When will our players experience such a moment?

We are all witness to the state of affairs about sports in our country. From the schooldays itself, we should keep in mind and identify which child has the potential for which sport. They should be selected there and their training should start. But today, our children are away from the playgrounds and remain obsessed with mobile phones. Neither the parents care much nor our government. Children’s playgrounds are also shrinking. Concrete jungles are encroaching upon them. If Saina Nehwal has risen from amidst us and made a name for herself today, the government has no contribution in it. This is the result of the determination of a mother who trained Saina from the age of five with a pledge to make her a world champion.

Saina Nehwal’s mother Usha Rani Nehwal was seven months pregnant and still played a local match. This shows her passion. Be it Saina Nehwal, Sania Mirza or Mary Kom or other players like them, all of them have been able to excel on their own strength and determination. Many people have potential but they do not get opportunities due to various reasons. Politics has to be kept away from sports, only then will success be achieved. Sometime back, I had heard that Maharashtra’s shooter Anjali Bhagwat, who earned a name in the world, faced a lot of harassment. Many such incidents keep coming to light. If incidents like these happen, why would anyone make sports his or her career?

Spotting and grooming children with potential is not an impossible task. It just needs perspective. You spot the children and give the responsibility to the industrial houses to mould them. Yes, it will be very important to keep in mind that the government does not interfere and the industrial houses should get full freedom for this purpose. And of course, also ensure that the craze for cricket should not destroy other games. We have to understand that cricket is not a national or international game. It’s neither in the Olympics nor in the Commonwealth Games. This is a club game. But cricket has become a religion in India. Given the amount of money cricket has, it has its share of controversies and scandals too. I would not like to discuss any of them. All I have to say is that to fulfil the dream of Milkha Singh and hold the tricolour aloft in the world of sports, we need to create enthusiasm, passion and love for sports among the children.

And finally, the only question to the system is when will you change, when will the country change, and when will this dream come true?

The author is the chairman, Editorial Board of Lokmat Media and former member of Rajya Sabha.

Though Milkha Singh is no longer among us. He has left a dream for all of us to fulfil, that some Indian athlete should win a gold medal in the Olympics. We will pay him a true tribute only when we are able to mould our youngsters into sporting stalwarts who will be able to win gold medals and make us all feel the thrill of the tricolour held high to the tune of ‘Jana Gana Mana…’ in the Olympics.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Significance of attaining the age of majority: Decoding the landmark judgements in the light of Article 21

The 242nd Law Commission Report titled ‘Prevention of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances (in the name of Honour and Tradition): A Suggested Legal Framework’ demonstrates how crimes and unwarranted interference against persons marrying have the catastrophic and grave chilling effect on the individual’s right to choose. The report highlights, “As far as India is concerned, ‘honour killings’ are mostly reported from the states of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and UP. Bhagalpur in Bihar is also one of the known places for ‘honour killings’.”

Published

on

If you are a major, you can even solemnize marriage with a criminal and no fetters can be placed on your choice; indeed, it may appear somewhat paradoxical to the ordinary mind but not to a legal mind. I am not pronouncing this verdict on unqualified grounds rather this phenomenon of the right to make a choice is the result of the peculiar stupendous judicial pronouncements. Recently, the right to choose a partner of one choice, the right to renounce one religion and accept another religion are such constructive, progressive, and liberal concepts that have garnered the substantive attention of large public discourse. But with the attention on the topic of choice of partner and religion, few people have paid attention to the subject matter of “Age of the Majority”.

According to Sec 3(1) of the Indian Majority Act 1875, an individual is said to attain the age of majority when he/she completes his/her 18 years. Article 21, does mandate that no person shall be deprived of his/her liberty but there is no such expression, expressly enumerated under this Article that we are having the liberty to marry a person, involved in criminal activities. Interestingly, it is worth mentioning that there are many rights guaranteed implicitly under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as it is the mother in recognizing the “Unrecognised liberties”. It is desirable to note that one of such recognitions, was recognizing the significance of an individual who attains the age of majority.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while recently hearing the contention advanced by the petitioner in the case of Soni Gerry v. Gerry Douglas (2018) 2 SCC 197 that the daughter is under illegal custody/detention and the Court must free her from illegal restraint. The Hon’ble Court considered this particular fact that the daughter had completed 18 years of age on 19.9.2016, thus she had attained the age of majority. In this regard, the landmark observation that was made by the Court that – ‘when an individual attains the age of majority, it has its own significance. It was also observed that he/she is entitled to make his/her choice. The Hon’ble Supreme Court rejected the contention to pass the writ of habeas corpus and held that she was not under illegal detention.

AGE OF MAJORITY: A DETERMINATE FACTOR IN UPHOLDING THE TWO MAJOR RIGHTS

Recognising the two major rights- the right to marry a person of one’s choice and the right to renounce one religion and accept another religion are appositely valued and also its esteemed status is conferred under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights also lays down the importance of age of majority that – “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

“India is a free and democratic country and once a person becomes a major he/she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut-off social relation with son or daughter,….”- This was the erudite observation made in the much-celebrated case of Lata Singh v. State of U.P and Another, (2006) 5 SCC 475 that reverberates in the Constitutional guarantee of freedom from the patriarchal tyranny and autocracy.

The notion of liberty was also examined and evaluated in the case of Gian Devi v. Superintendent, Nari Niketan, Delhi (1976) 3 SCC 234, that the girl has attained the age of majority and no restraints can be placed on her choices of the person with whom she is to stay, nor can any restriction be imposed regarding the place where she could stay. Even the Court does not possess the right to determine.

The landmark case of Shafin Jahan v. K.M Ashokan & Ors. AIR 2018 SC 357 cannot be ignored as the same is an important development for the right to choose a partner of one’s choice. It is worth stepping into the facts of the case where a girl namely Hadiya aged 26 years converted herself to Islam and married a Muslim boy namely Shafin Jahan. In this case, the father Ashokan moved a habeas corpus petition before the Hon’ble Kerala High Court alleged that her girl Hadiya was the victim of systematic psychological manipulation and forcefully converted to Islam and in the furtherance of same, her daughter was likely to transport out of the country. The High Court accepted the contentions and allowed him to sustain the writ petition of habeas corpus and annulled the marriage of her with Shafin Jahan. The High Court of Kerala was in the view that even though she has attained the age of majority, she is weak and vulnerable and capable of being exploited in many ways in the circumstances noticed in this instant case. An investigation was also ordered to National Investigation Agency to investigate the ‘education, family background, antecedents and other relevant details of Shafin Jahan and it is fascinating to note that the principal finding of the report was that Shafin Jahan is accused in a criminal case and his Facebook posts show a radical inclination.

When this matter came before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it was observed that Kerala High Court has failed to recognize the undisputed fact that the girl Hadiya is major, and when an individual attains the age of majority, he/she becomes capable to take her own decision. It was also observed that the annulment order passed by the Kerala High Court is the non-acceptance of her choice that simply transgresses her fundamental rights guaranteed under our Constitution. The Kerala High Court, being a Constitutional Court was not supposed to interfere in this matter as the very interference amounts to a miscarriage of justice and the liberty and dignity of two consenting adults who have been subjected to judicial affront. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also clarified that if there is any criminality in any sphere then NIA may continue its investigation however the validity shall not form the subject matter of the investigation and NIA cannot interfere with the marital status of the two major couples. The appeal was allowed and judgment of the High Court was set aside.

There are other landmark judgments as well but in this overall context, the importance of emphasizing the concept of age of majority and right to make a free choice that the basic elements of a dignified life are also the realization of the significance of the right to choose within the legitimate parameters of the law. The individual’s authority is supreme and no one possesses the right to dictate or limit a person’s choice. Our choices are cherished because they are ours. Indeed, it is not a privilege rather a right of a major and more importantly it is further protected by the Constitution of India which ensures that every person can make the determinations on the matters which is central to the pursuit of happiness and is the intrinsic part of liberty and dignity guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

Grave Social Symptoms: The Unwarranted Interference and Distressful Silence

It is disheartening to see all the survey carried or report submitted have become veritable documents of the fact that consent of family or the society or the clan is still required to enter into a wedlock. Despite of the fact, no shackles can be placed on the choice of a major, still there is an unwarranted interference of the family or the society or the clan that guillotines the freedom and liberty guaranteed under the Constitution of India and the distressful silence of the protectors of this right succumbs the objective of our Constitutional guarantee of freedom of choice which is the quintessence of the 21st Century.

The 242nd Law Commission Report titled “Prevention of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances (in the name of Honour and Tradition): A Suggested Legal Framework” demonstrates that how crimes and unwarranted interference against persons marrying have the catastrophic and grave chilling effect on the individual’s right to choose. The report highlights that- “As far as India is concerned, “honour killings” are mostly reported from the States of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and U.P. Bhagalpur in Bihar is also one of the known places for ‘honour killings”. Even some incidents are reported from Delhi and Tamil Nadu. Marriages with members of other castes or the couple leaving the parental home to live together and marry provoke the harmful acts against the couple and immediate family members.”

The Report also underlines the pernicious interference of caste/community assemblies in the guise of ‘Khap Panchayats’ that underscores the liberty and instil the terror by inhuman treatment and inflicting the excessively harsh punishments on those individuals who tried to do exogamous marriage. Unfortunately, these merciless hands haunt the dignity of the individuals in the name of ‘moral vigilantism’ and distressful silence of the society waters them to continue this evil practise.

In 2018, Lok Foundation-Oxford University Survey run by the Centre for Monitoring India Economy (CMIE) reported that just 3 percent of marriages are love marriages. According to the 2011-12 India Human Development Survey, only 13 percent of married women in metro cities knew their husbands prior to marriage. Arranged marriages do not imply forced marriages necessarily however, this fact cannot be ignored that most of the Indian families and communities try to maintain endogamous marriage.

REASON BEHIND SUCH GRAVE SOCIAL SYMPTOMS

It is apt to refer to the case of Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2011) 6 SCC 396 where the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that many people feel that they are disgraced or dishonoured by the conduct of the young individuals who is related to them or belongs to their caste simply because they marry against their will or wishes or having an affair with someone, and as a result, they take the law into their hands and mentally, physically assault them and inflict the other atrocities which is not lawful in the eyes of law. The 242nd Law Commission Report mentions that the crimes against the young individuals take place as the result of doing exogamous marriage without receiving the family consent. Even the marriages between the young couples outside the gotra often called the violent reaction from the family or clan or society.

Ostensibly, it is clear that that the couples must be freed from the unlawful fetters or hindrances placed by the so-called social guardians who are doing nothing for the benefit for the society rather killing the soul of our Constitution. Hence, it is important to break down the same.

STEPS TAKEN

Undoubtedly, the Courts are playing the active and important role in asserting the choices of majors. For this reason, this particular subject matter becomes of utmost importance. The case of Sakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192 is the evident and glaring example where the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed the police departments and State governments to adopt a robust mechanism to eradicate the crime of ‘Honour Killing’. The Hon’ble Court laid down certain guidelines which was preventive and punitive in nature. Also, the remedial measures were issued. However, if the governments and administrations at the different tiers will not work properly and become silent spectator then the importance of same will languish which is fortunately not in our case.

In order to boost and encourage the inter-caste marriages, the NDA government is providing Rs. 2.5 lakh for every inter-caste marriage with Dalit under the ‘Dr. Ambedkar scheme for social integration through inter-caste marriage’. This financial motivation was started in 2013 but there was a bar that total income must be less than Rs. 5 lakhs so that one can be eligible to receive the one-time monetary incentives of Rs. 2.5 lakhs. Recently, in order to infuse the teachings of BR Ambedkar in the society and to promote the social equity, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment took this bold step and scrapped this bar. This will definitely help in the effective implementation and the administration of this scheme. Many states also have the similar schemes and protective, pre-emptive and corrective measures to curb the menace of crimes against the individuals and to assert their choices. For instance, Bihar government provides the National Saving Certificate amounting to Rs 25,000/- as monetary incentive to women performing inter-caste marriage. The Madhya Pradesh Government has a dedicated cell better known as ‘Crime Against Women Cell” that ensures the safety of couples.

CLOSING OBSERVATIONS

Indeed, The notion of ‘Significance of Age of Majority’ has achieved the landmark growth. Still, in the long growth, the directions issued by the Courts and policy, measures adopted by the Central and State governments has to reach at the grassroot levels and more importantly the society itself has to come forward to stamp out the acts of barbarism against the individuals “WHO HAVE ATTAINED THE AGE OF MAJORITY”.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Second coronavirus wave, administration and Fundamental Rights

The pandemic saw the infringement of various Fundamental Rights guaranteed by our Constitution. The fundamental human rights that are most affected are ‘Right to Health’ and ‘Right to Life’ which also includes ‘Right to die with dignity’. In many well-known judgements, the Supreme Court and several High Courts agreed that the dead corpse should be treated with proper dignity and treated fairly. The Supreme Court recognised that right to life extends not only to living persons but also to their bodies after death.

Published

on

In the words of William Shakespeare which says “All that lives must die, passing through nature to eternity.”While death is regarded as a natural occurrence, the basic decent treatment that is anticipated and should be provided to the deceased does not always germinate and materialize naturally. We recently had to witness such tragic cases which have not only shocked the entire country but have also witnessed and drawn intervention towards this grave issue from all over the world.

Sightings of dead bodies floating on the bank of the holy river Ganga were reported in the country’s top newspapers. Villagers in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh discovered bodies in the Ganga and Yamuna rivers on May 11, 2021. Ganga, a holy river where people undertake various rituals in relation to ceremonies that are therein mentioned in their holy book, they not only perform ceremonies but also venerate river Ganga for its purity. On May 11, seven bodies wrapped in plastic bags were discovered floating in Uttar Pradesh’s Ghazipur and Hamirpur districts. Similar incidents have also been reported in the Baksar district of Bihar. The greatest concern among residents was that stray dogs and birds would devour the carcasses which would then result in spreading the coronavirus. However, instead of taking action against those responsible for the malafide attacks, the state authorities are now playing a blame game with one another. The world is in danger and the situation has been seen severely detrimental among masses. The heart-rending incidents from these states remind us of the last Mughal emperor and his poetic lament. Unable to find a final resting place in his beloved homeland (India), the last Mughal emperor quite rightly put forth the plight of the dead – Kitna hai badnaseeb Zafar dafn ke liye/Do gazz amen bhi na milikoo-e-yaar mein (How unlucky is Zafar! For burial, even two yards of land were not to be had in the land of his beloved). In the recent past, a ‘novel’ difficulty, similar to the ‘novel’ Corona Virus, has arisen for our contemplation, which would be guided eventually from the foundations of this present article. The article shall examine three major contentions vis-à-vis the issue of dead bodies which were found floating on the banks of river Ganga. Firstly, whether the actions of state authorities being negligent towards the horrendous issue i.e the floating of dead bodies, be condemned? Secondly, the fundamental right of a dead person, enumerated under the constitution of India violated or do we not owe a duty to cremate the deceased respectfully? Third, is there a need to amend the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on management of corpses?

NEGLIGENCE ON PART OF STATE AUTHORITIES

The term other authorities that are enumerated under Article 12 of the constitution of India has given interpretation to the term ‘AUTHORITIES’ by the means of landmark precedents. It is settled law that the State under Article 12 is the custodian of the welfare and wellbeing of its citizens. However, looking at the present scenario the situation seems to be such where the actions on part of state authorities are not at all seems to be custodian but seems to become a warrior against the interest of masses.

Legislation derives its power from the constitutions of India, 1950 which grant the liberal interpretation of Articles 21, 48 and 51(g) by the Hon’ble Judges of Apex court and other courts across the country. In the famous case of Narmada Bachao Andolan v. union of India 2010 SCC 664, The Supreme Court has held that the right to clean water is a fundamental right under article 21 of the Indian constitution. Water prevention and control of pollution act of 1974 is the key specific legislation for preventing water pollution and for taking care and maintaining water bodies. It also aims for promoting for restoration of water bodies. For better implementation of the act, the Central pollution control board and the state pollution control board have been established by the Central and the state government. Under the aforesaid act, the board has the requisite power to encourage and conduct research and investigation with the view of promoting, the prevention of contamination of water in a significant manner and also to add the central government for the matters relating to environmental issues and for the prevention and control of water pollution. In the present issue, the duties and obligations that have been imparted to such boards and the ones enumerated in the aforesaid act have been brazenly ignored by state authorities. They have failed to impart their duties in such remorse condition because of which the lives of masses are now at stake. Hence, because of the aforesaid reason the actions of state authorities should be condemned.

DEAD PERSON TOO HOLDS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

The flagrants acts during the pandemic has resulted in the infringement of various Fundamental Rights guaranteed by our Constitution.The fundamental human rights that are most affected are “Right to Health” and “Right to Life which also includes Right to die with dignity.” In many well-known judgements, the Supreme Court of India and many High Courts agreed that the dead corpse should be treated with proper dignity and treated fairly. The Supreme Court of India recognized that right to life, to fair treatment and dignity, extends not only to a living person but also to their bodies after death. In a landmark judgment (Common Cause, A Regd. Society V. Union of India & Anr.) delivered on 9th March, 2018, the Supreme Court of India held that the right to die with dignity is an intrinsic facet of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In fact, in the year 2007, the Madras high court in the case of S.Sethu Raja vs The Chief Secretary (2007) 5 MLJ 404 had held in Para 18 of the Judgment that the same human dignity (if not more) with which a living being is suppose to be treated by our tradition and our culture should also apply to the dead person and he too holds a right of dignified burial or cremation of a dead body. The right to decent burial is upholding in Indian context, but who is authorized for burial is not explained in any Indian Law. There is a strong societal interest in the proper disposition of the bodies of deceased person. It is universally accepted that a duty is owed to both society and the deceased that the body be buried without any unnecessary delay.

AMENDEDMENT IN THE GUIDELINES AMID COVID-19 IS ‘THE NEED OF THE HOUR’

A document containing ‘Dead Body Guidelines (COVID-19)’ – [hereinafter, ‘Document’], was released by the Directorate General of Health Services (EMR División), Minister of Health and Family Welfare of India on March 15, 2020. To date, it remains unamended and builds on the epidemiological understanding of COVID-19 of the Ministry at present. The aforesaid document lacks some crucial quintessential.

Thereby, the authors would like to propose some takeaways from the other jurisdiction of the nations across the globe, which can be included in the aforesaid guidelines for the benefit of the masses across the country.

The guidelines should be inclusive or seeks to impose a compulsory cremation of the covid-19 victims, which is foremost aimed to prevent local bodies from being able to cremate the body of the deceased overriding his/her religious belief.

In the midst of the global pandemic of covid-19 where graveyards and crematoriums crammed, the locals people of various states are of the view that there emerged shortage of woods for pyre, thereby resulted in the hike in the cost of cremation, whereby this becomes the sole reason why the bodies were buried or seen floating. Hence, the guidelines should impose a reasonable amount or capped a certain amount that crematoriums can charge from families at the time of cremation of a dead body.

Prices should be regulated for hearse or ambulance services so that people are not used and are not exposed to difficulty transporting dead bodies.

The guideline should impose sanction on those people committing horrendous acts such as throwing bodies in rivers, not cremating bodies as per rules enumerated therein.

In order to avoid health risks from smoke emission from burning pyres in large numbers, the use of electric crematoria can be encouraged.

The burial or cremation of masses should not occur because it infringes the right to dignity of the dead.

CONCLUSION

India has been overwhelmed by a devastating second wave of the pandemic in recent weeks. It has recorded more than 25 million cases and 2,75,000 deaths. But the experts say the real death toll is several times higher. The bodies dumped on the river banks and the funeral pyres burning round the clock and cremation grounds running out of space are the proof that the official tally of deaths represent a substantial undercount of the true burdens. In recent times, various eye opening incidents surfaced through media wherein humans were seen to be treated worse than animals. There were interminable news reports which reported incidents like dumping of corpses in a pit at a burial ground without performing their last rites. Many photographs and videos of the half burnt and decomposed dead bodies have gone viral on social media. In order to stop this menace that is bulging the entire nation, all those aforesaid measure as stated hereinabove should be adopted and the the adminstration should pay heed and curb against all those activities that are disturbing not only the rights of dead person but all the right of a living person.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Freedom of speech & sedition law in India : An analysis in the light of recent controversy

The definition of sedition must be narrowed down to encompass only the problems pertaining to the territorial integrity of India, in addition to the sovereignty of the country. The word ‘sedition’ is extraordinarily nuanced and needs to be implemented with caution. It should rarely be used but kept by and large as a deterrent.

Raju Kumar

Published

on

INTRODUCTION

It is an irony for the mostdemocratic nation, ie, India, where freedom of speech and expression has been granted under the Indian Constitu- tion, and while exercising their power enshrined un- der the Constitution of India. they are being booked for the offence of sedition. Accord ing to the report of Rights and Risks Analysis Group, as many as 55 journalists were targeted by the government during 25 March and 31 May for covering facts about the government handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Recently, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the sedition case registered against senior journalist Vinod Dua in Himachal Pradesh. The verdict was pronounced by a single judge bench led by Hon’ble Justice UU. Lalit.

Vinod Dua was booked for sedition for criticising the Narendra Modi government’s handling of the Covid-19 lock down and had uploaded the same on Youtube last year, While granting the relief the court relied on the principles laid down in the Judgment of Kedar Nath. The judg ment was delivered in the year 1962, where the consti- tutional validity of sedition law in India was validated. However, it was observed that free speech, discussions on matters of government functioning and their criti cism, and freedom of press are “essential for the proper functioning of the processes of popular government Currently, in the Vinod Dua case, the Hon’ble Court has also observed that the jour nalist will be entitled to pro tection under the judgment”.

It was further observed that “It must, however, beclarified that every Journalist will be entitled to protection in terms of Kedar Nath Singh, as every prosecution under Sections 124 and 505 of the IPC must be in strict conformity with the scope and ambit of said Sections as explained in, and completely in tune with the law laid down in Kedar Nath Singh”. The Court Held that

HISTORICAL

BACKGROUND OF SEDITION LAW

Sedition laws were enacted during 17th century England, when the lawmakers believed that only good opinions of the government should survive as the criticism of a Govern- ment may result in detri- mental to the government and monarchy. The law was originally drafted in 1837 by the father of the Indian Penal Code, Thomas Macaulay, but it was omitted when the In- dian Penal Code (IPC) was enacted in the year 1860.

Many freedom fighters were charged under this provision which includes the case of Joggendra Chandra Bose, who was the editor of the newspaper, Bangbosi, who wrote an article criticis ing the age of consent Bill for posing a threat to the religion and for its coercive relation ship with Indians.

Great freedom fighters like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi were also booked under this offense.

SEDITION LAW IN INDIA: CURRENT SCENARIO

Sedition is an offense under Sectio 124A of the Indian Penal Code (Hereinafter re- ferred to as IPC), 1860. See tion 124A IPC, defines the offense sedition when “any person by words, either spo- kenorwritten, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or con- tempt, or excites or attempts toexcite disaffection towards the government established by law in India”. Disaffection also includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. How ever, it is here notable that comments without exciting or attempting to excite ha tred, contempt or disaffee tion, will not constitute an offense under this section.

PUNISHMENT FOR SEDITION

Sedition is a non-bailable offense. Punishment un der Section 124A ranges from imprisonment up to three years to a life term. to which fine may be added. It is also notable that if a person is charged under this law, he will be barred from a govern ment Job. They have to live without their passport and must produce themselves in
constitutional. Furthermore, it was also held that the dis turbing the public order will mean nothing less than en dangering the foundations of the Stateor threatening its overthrow: These Judgments prompted the First Constitu tion Amendment, where Ar ticle 19 (2) was rewritten to replace “undermining the security of the State” with “in the interest of public order”. In the year 1962, in the historic judgment of Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar. the supreme court decided on the constitutionality of See tion 124A. The Hon’ble court upheld the constitutionality of sedition, but had limited its application to “acts involving intention or tendency tore ate disorder,ordisturbance of law and order, or incitement to violence”. Itdistinguished these from “very strong speech” or the use of “vigor ous words” strongly critical of the government.

In the year 1965, the Su preme Court, in the judgment of Balwant Singh vs State of Punjab, held that mere slo ganeering which evoked no public response did not amount to sedition.

ARGUMENTS FOR SECTION 124A

The Provision of Sedition law has its application in fighting anti-national, secessionist and terrorist elements. It is argued withinside the fa- vour of this law that, it pro tects the elected government from tries to overthrow the authorities with violence and unlawful means. The continued existence of the government set up through regulation is an important circumstance of the stability of the State. Furthermore, it is also believed that if Contempt of court results in the penal action, the contempt of Gov ernment should also attract
the same.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST SECTION 124A

The Provision of Sedition Law isarelic of colonial lega cyand it is not fit for democra- ey This is a restriction on the legal exercise of the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution. Government disagreements and criti cisms are an important part of healthy public debate in dynamie democracy. They should not be constructed as sedition. It is notable that The British who resisted the suppression of the Indians overturned their countrys laws. India has no reason not to abolish this part and
the time has come to amend this portion. It is also argued against this law that the terms usedunder Section 124A like disaffection are vague and subject to different interpre- tations to the whims and fan- cies of the investigating offi- cers. The sedition law isbeing misused as a tool to persecute political dissent. A wide and concentrated executive dis- cretion is inbuilt into it which permits the blatant abuse.

CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD

Dr Justice (Retd.) Balbir Singh Chouhan has observed that “The sedition law needs reconsideration”. Since the creation of this British Sedition Law, its application has always been inconsistent. In all cases, its application is vague and self-contradictory. Considering that it is used to suppress the masses, when it serves the masses, its application was initially vague. It is used as a tool to strengthen political motivations by preventing speeches that threaten the authority of the country. A clear and unam- biguous explanation of the crime. In recent years, the ap- plication of the sedition law has been too arbitrary and has become a controversial topic. Although our sedition position was established in 1960, it still exists. Over the past 50 years, Indian society has developed rapidly, and people have shown “toler ance” towards summons and violence. The nature of the government has also changed, and people’s under- standing of the government is different from that of its representatives.

India is the largest de- mocracy of the world and the right to free speech and expression is a vital aspect of democracy. The expres- sion or thought that isn’t in consonance with the policy

Freedom of speech & sedition kew in India: An analysis in the light of recent controversy

of the government of the day must now no longer be taken into consideration as sedition. Section 124A mus now no longer be misused as a device to scale down loose speech. The SC caveat, giver in Kedar Nath case, on pros ecution beneathneath the regulation can test its misuse It needs to be tested under the modified facts and situation: 1 additionally at the anvi of ever-evolving tests of ne cessity, proportionality and arbitrariness. The higher judiciary must use its super visory powers to sensitize the magistracy and police to the constitutional provision: protective free speech. The definition of sedition mus be narrowed down, to en compass only the problem: pertaining to the territoria integrity of India in addi tion to the sovereignty of the country. The word ‘sedition is extraordinarily nuancec and needs to be implement ed with caution. It is sort of a cannon that ought now no longer for use to shoot a mouse; however the arsena additionally needs posses sion of cannons, by and larg as a deterrent, and sometimes for shooting.

India is the largest democracy of the world and the right to free speech and expression
is a vital aspect of democracy. The expression or thought that isn’t in consonance
with the policy of the government of the day must now no longer be taken into
consideration as sedition. Section 124A must now no longer be misused as a device
to scale down loose speech. The SC caveat, given in the Kedarnath case, can test its
misuse. It needs to be tested under the modified facts and situations and additionally
at the anvil of ever-evolving tests of necessity, proportionality and arbitrariness.

Continue Reading

Policy & Politics

Tax on ocean freight: A case of inequitable double taxation at its best

Supply of ocean freight service is not covered either by Section 7 (inter-state supply) or Section 8 (intra-state supply) of the IGST Act. The Act does not contemplate levy or collection of tax from a person who is neither the supplier nor the recipient of supply.

Published

on

HOW TAX ON OCEAN FREIGHT WORKS

 Ocean Freight is a method of transporting huge quantities of goods through the sea. The levy of taxes on Ocean Freight has been a matter of dispute in India for a while now. The GST law requires the importers to pay tax on ocean freight services under Section 9(3) of the CGST Act and Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, better known as the ‘Reverse Charge Mechanism’.

The location of the Service Provider (SP) and the Service Recipient (SR) must be considered. If the location of the SP and the SR is in India, Section 12(8) applies. But when the Location of SP or SR is outside India, the location of the SR is considered, unless the location of the SP is not known, then the SP’s location is considered but only for transportation [under Section 13(9)]. If the SP and SR are both outside India, the Importer is liable to pay IGST @ 5%. In addition to this, the importer also pays customs duty, freight on the CIF (Cost, Insurance and Freight) value and insurance even if the importer has paid IGST on the CIF value, he is still required to pay GST on ocean freight. This, is what any prudent person would term as “double taxation”.

When it comes to import on the CIF basis, the foreign supplier transports goods from a place outside India through a foreign shipping agency, to a port located in India. In CIF, the freight is paid by the foreign exporter to the shipping agency and the foreign supplier transports such shipment through the foreign shipping agency.

BEFORE GST

 From 01.06.2016, transportation of goods from a place outside India up to the customs clearance station in India became liable to service tax, through the Finance Act, 2016. But an exemption was given for services by way of transportation of goods by an aircraft from a place outside India up to the customs clearance station.

If the service provider was situated outside India, the liability to pay service tax would be on the service recipient. In Free on Board (FoB) imports, service tax would be payable by the shipping line, if the shipping line was based in India; and the service tax would be payable by the importer under reverse charge if the shipping line is not based in India.

In case of CIF imports, there was no service tax levy on freight, as the service provider as well as the service recipient are situated outside India.

There existed ambiguity in levy of service tax that was attracted on ocean freight component only in case of FOB imports, and not attracted for CIF imports.

Vide Notifications dated. 12.01.2017 (Notification 3/2017) and 20.06.2012 (Notification 30/2012 ST), some efforts were made to clear the ambiguities. In addition to this, in respect of services provided or agreed to be provided by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs clearance station in India, the person liable for paying service tax other than the service provider would be the person in India who complies with sections 29, 30 or 38 read with section 148 of the Customs Act, 1962.

In addition to this a series of Notifications were issued pursuant to the problem at hand:

 1. Vide Notification dated. 13.04.2017 (Notification 2/2017 ST), the definition of “person liable for payment of service tax” under Rule 2 (1) (d) (i) was amended and a new sub rule (Rule 7CA) was introduced in the Service Tax Rules, 1994.

 2. Vide Notification dated. 13.04.2017 (Notification 14/2017 ST), a new rule, Rule 8B was introduced in Point of Taxation Rules, 2011, which spoke about the “Determination of point of taxation in case of services provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person in non-taxable territory.”

3. Vide Notification dated. 13.04.2017 (Notification 10/2017 CE NT), the definition of “input service” in the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, was amended to further facilitate proper implementation of the respective tax provisions.

The importer was thus made liable to pay service tax for the services of transportation of goods by vessel from a foreign port to Indian port in case of CIF imports.

 The above position continued up to 30.06.2017, i.e., until the introduction of GST.

UNDER GST

 And as per Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, the value of the imported goods shall be the transaction value of such goods for the purpose of levy of Customs duty and such transaction value in the case of imported goods shall include, in addition to price, any amount paid or payable for costs and services, including commissions and brokerage, royalties and licence fees, costs of transportation to the place of import, insurance, loading, unloading and handling charges to the extent as per Rule 10(2) of the Customs valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007.

Section 5(3) of the IGST Act, 2017 empowered the Centre to issue notification, specify categories of supply of goods or services or both, the tax on which shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient of such goods or services or both and the recipient of such goods or services or both is liable to pay tax under reverse charge in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both.

Where the value of taxable service provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India is not available with the person liable for paying integrated tax, the same shall be deemed to be 10 % of the CIF value of imported goods.

How ocean freight suffers double taxation

Ocean freight component suffers tax twice; first, it suffers IGST as component of Customs Duty on imported goods on CIF basis and second time IGST @ 5% in the form of Import of Services (Reverse Charge Mechanism) for payment by the importer. Therefore, IGST payment is levied twice on Ocean freight in the guise as part of transaction value of imported goods.

The impugned notifications are contrary to the provisions of Article 265 of the Indian Constitution which says that “no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law”. A delegated legislation (includes the notifications herein or rules) cannot provide levy or collection of tax which is not authorised by the parent statute.

 Supply of ocean freight service is not covered either by Section 7 (inter-state supply) or Section 8 (intra-state supply) of the IGST Act. The Act does not contemplate levy or collection of tax from a person who is neither the supplier nor the recipient of supply.

A person other than a recipient cannot determine the “time of supply” as per the provisions of Section 13 of the IGST Act. In addition to this, Input Tax Credit can only be availed by the recipient of the supply which are intended to be used in the course of furtherance of business, under the provisions of Section 16 of the Act.

 The Supreme Court in case of State of Rajasthan v. Basant Agrotech (India) Limited [2014 (302) E.L.T. 3 (SC)], held that the rule of construction of a charging section is that before taxing any person, it must be shown that he falls within the ambit of the charging section by clear words used in the section. No one can be taxed by implication. A charging section has to be constructed strictly. If a person has not been brought within the ambit of the charging section by clear words, he cannot be taxed at all.

Commissioner of Central Excise v. Acer India Limited [2004 (172) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.)], the SC held – “The intention of the legislature in a taxation statute is to be gathered from the language of the provisions particularly where the language is plain and unambiguous. In a taxing Act it is not possible to assume any intention or governing purpose of the statute more than what is stated in the plain language. It is not the economic result sought to be obtained by making the provision which is relevant in interpreting a fiscal statute. Equally impermissible is an interpretation which does not follow from the plan, unambiguous language of the statute. Words cannot be added to or substituted so as to give a meaning to the statute which will serve the spirit and intention of the legislature. The statute should clearly and unambiguously convey the three components of the tax law i.e. the subject of the tax, the person who is liable to pay the tax and the rate at which the tax is to be paid. If there is any ambiguity regarding any of these ingredients in a taxation statute, then there is no tax in law.”

The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India [Special Civil Application No. 726 of 2018], has set aside IGST on Ocean Freight and held that no tax is leviable under the IGST Act, 2017 on the ocean freight for the services provided by a person located in a non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India and the levy and collection of tax of such ocean freight under the impugned Notifications is not permissible in law and that taxing ocean freight is ultra vires and leads to double taxation.

Despite the attempts of the judiciary in defending the very concept of negating any occurrence of double taxation, the efforts made to amend the imprudent levy of IGST on ocean freight, or so to say, the lack thereof, is still very unsettling.

A person other than a recipient cannot determine the “time of supply” as per the provisions of Section 13 of the IGST Act. In addition to this, Input Tax Credit can only be availed by the recipient of the supply which are intended to be used in the course of furtherance of business, under the provisions of Section 16 of the Act.

Continue Reading

Trending