KartavyaDesk
news

Exemptions for the State under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act risk recreating long-standing anxieties over unchecked digital surveillance in India. Evaluate how the constitutional tests of necessity and proportionality should guide future rule-making.

Kartavya Desk Staff

Topic: Mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections.

Topic: Mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections.

Q3. Exemptions for the State under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act risk recreating long-standing anxieties over unchecked digital surveillance in India. Evaluate how the constitutional tests of necessity and proportionality should guide future rule-making. (10 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: TH

Why the question Because the DPDP Act’s wide State exemptions have triggered debates on digital surveillance, constitutional safeguards, and the proper limits of executive discretion. Key demand of the question Evaluate how State exemptions raise surveillance concerns and explain how the constitutional standards of necessity and proportionality should shape future rules under the DPDP Act. Structure of the Answer Introduction Briefly state how a data protection framework must balance citizen privacy with legitimate State functions, and why exemptions create constitutional concerns. Body Suggest how broad State exemptions may create risks of concentrated executive power, opaque data use, and weakened privacy protections. Indicate how the principles of legitimate aim, rational connection, least intrusive alternative, and procedural safeguards should guide rule-making under DPDP. Conclusion State that embedding necessity and proportionality into DPDP rules can align national security with constitutional liberties and enhance trust in digital governance.

Why the question

Because the DPDP Act’s wide State exemptions have triggered debates on digital surveillance, constitutional safeguards, and the proper limits of executive discretion.

Key demand of the question

Evaluate how State exemptions raise surveillance concerns and explain how the constitutional standards of necessity and proportionality should shape future rules under the DPDP Act.

Structure of the Answer

Introduction

Briefly state how a data protection framework must balance citizen privacy with legitimate State functions, and why exemptions create constitutional concerns.

Suggest how broad State exemptions may create risks of concentrated executive power, opaque data use, and weakened privacy protections.

Indicate how the principles of legitimate aim, rational connection, least intrusive alternative, and procedural safeguards should guide rule-making under DPDP.

Conclusion

State that embedding necessity and proportionality into DPDP rules can align national security with constitutional liberties and enhance trust in digital governance.

AI-assisted content, editorially reviewed by Kartavya Desk Staff.

About Kartavya Desk Staff

Articles in our archive published before our editorial team was expanded. Legacy content is periodically reviewed and updated by our current editors.

All News