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]
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.
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.
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.
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.
The three routes Mr. Modi government has chosen to bypass parliamentary scrutiny and oversight on the law it creates are by bypassing parliamentary committee or passing them through ordinances or as money bill:
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.
Thank you. The minority rights and individual rights are cornerstone, democracy does not mean majority act as Emperors. There has to be strong guaranteed equal rights to all individual and minorities that allows them equal opportunity and recourse.
Its foundation is that all agree what we should all have as rights were we to ever find ourselves the minority, and those become the principles we cannot break and we owe to each individual to uphold. Beyond that, majority can decide, hopefully not stupidly and still considering minority's input, as any good leader should do, consider all data points relevant to best decision making.
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.
> 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.
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.
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).
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.
> 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.
> 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.
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]
India had universal suffrage in 1950 and has deep parliamentary traditions. India was a democracy before the US, France, UK, Spain and numerous other Western cradles of democracy.
US got universal suffrage in 1965 (Voting Rights act).
France was killing a million Algerians whom it ruled and were demanding self-determination in 1954-1962 and finally became colony free in 1977.
UK was running concentration camps in Kenya in the 1960s and free of its last colony in the 1980 approaching something like Universal Suffrage.
Spain was a dictatorship till 1979.
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.
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).
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)
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.
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
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.
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.
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 naïve 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.
"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).
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
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
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?
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.
A complaint that the bill is "compliance intensive" could mean that the "startups" don't want to comply (so it must be a good bill), that the bill imposes expensive and unnecessary bureaucracy, or both.
Correspondingly, the government could be caving in to private interests, wisely redesigning a bad law, or both.
FYI, they withdrew it because of major issues that need to be rectified. it will be reintroduced later after the changes have been made. this is how a parliamentary democracy works, how much ever the american media tries to present India as a lawless mess. sure there's things to improve, but name one democracy where there isn't.
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.
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
>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.
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.
Majority of the arguments posted here are only for "Modi-ashing"; I'd be tempted to assume they have no idea about the inner workings of the parliamentary processes or how laws are made or governed.
The "discussion" has veered off from the initial Joint Parliamentary Committe reports on the incompatibility of the far reaching law on personal data protection. The bill is just withdrawn to be replaced by a different one. There's nothing special there. That's the purpose of the JPC, and I am glad the Government avoided the adversarial clash with the JPC to account for the suggestions therein.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...