Guidelines on device seizures vital

The Supreme Court’s direction to the government to frame guidelines to be observed by the authorities when seizing digital devices owned by journalists will hopefully help to deal with the new form of threat to freedom of expression that has emerged lately. Central investigative agencies have resorted to the practice of seizing journalists’ communication devices like laptops and mobile phones when raiding their organisations.

This was seen most recently in the raids on the office of a news portal, NewsClick, and the residences of its journalists and contributors. While directing the government to frame the guidelines in response to a petition filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals, the court remarked that uncontrolled power to access journalists’ devices is unacceptable. It has also directed that a set of suggested guidelines submitted to the court may be circulated among the Union and state governments for their response. The court said it cannot accept the dangerous “all-within power” attitude of the agencies, and that it is ready to frame the guidelines itself if the government does not do it. 

The guidelines should ensure that the seizure of devices does not impede the journalists’ ability to do their job, that they are not incriminated through tampering of their devices, their privacy is not violated and the confidentiality of their sources and information is protected. Digital devices may have personal, financial and other information, including information about or provided by others.

These must be protected according to laid-down procedures and should not be passed on to third parties. Searches and seizures should be made only on the basis of judicial warrants and for specific information, and not as a fishing expedition looking for wrong-doing or material which can be used against the journalists. In many instances where devices have been taken away, their hash values were not given to the journalists. A comprehensive set of guidelines should be evolved which will ensure that the personal and professional rights of journalists are protected. 

The government told the court that there are “several complicated legal issues to be examined” in the matter. While the court agreed that there should be a balance between the State’s power and the individual’s rights, it is clear that guidelines are required to ensure that the powers of government agencies are not misused. The court observed that “it can’t be a State that’s run only through its agencies.” In countries like the UK and the US, there are very strict rules and regulations that govern searches and seizures of electronic devices. In India whatever rules are there are not being followed. Therefore, it is necessary to institute a strong regime to protect freedom of expression and journalists’ rights.