Reels shot without consent sparks row over women’s privacy

Bengaluru: The arrest of the owner of an Instagram account that posted reels of women on CBD roads has raised questions about women’s privacy and safety.

The visuals were taken without their consent and posted on the account, which has 11,000 followers.

A college student featured in one of the reels drew attention to the account after she started receiving vulgar messages from unknown social media users.

According to Deputy Commissioner of Police (South) Lokesh B Jagalasar, in matters of street photography, what makes photography or videography of a person illegal or criminal is when the explicit consent of the lady concerned is not taken.

“The moment the person does not give consent, it is not okay to photograph or videograph her; it is a voyeuristic act. Secondly, the nature of photos you’re putting out should not be something which will portray a woman indecently. Even if you capture without consent but take a decent photograph, that’s also not okay,” he said.

Consent is the minimum and it must be explicit. This falls under the voyeurism provisions of the BNS and the IT Act. “In the name of content creation or something similar, people are performing these acts nowadays. In this particular case, that person was trying to camouflage it by saying, ‘I am doing street photography,” the officer said. 

Lawyer Raghavendra Raikar states that it’s a criminal offence to capture images of a woman engaging in a private act without her consent in public, and it also prohibits the dissemination of such images or videos. “If she gives consent for her photography, then it’s okay. Finally it’s up to the court to decide,” he added.

Tech hygiene and sensitisation are key in curbing voyeuristic social media accounts, say Internet security activists.

The legality of filming people on a public street is not straightforward, notes Apar Gupta of Internet Freedom Foundation. 

“It is important to consider the purpose with which a person conducts an activity to ascertain if it is permissible since it impacts individual autonomy,” he explains, adding that in the Puttaswamy judgment, nine judges of the Supreme Court made several observations on the subject including the fact that right to privacy exists even in public spaces. 

Tanveer Hasan of the Centre for Internet Security believes that introducing a law is not the only remedy.

“If they bring in a law, it might violate the fundamental rights of citizens. Tech should be seen as a social practice. People should be sensitised to irresponsible use of social media and taught about tech hygiene,” he said.