Pegasus Spyware- A Threat To Cyber Protection Laws In India
Author: LawSphereX
Category: Technology, Cyber & Privacy
Published:
Updated:
PEGASUS SPYWARE- A THREAT TO CYBER PROTECTION
LAWS IN INDIA Ananya Singh, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India PEGASUS SPYWARE Pegasus is a type of malicious software or malware classified as spyware designed to infiltrate IOS and android devices to secretly collect information from the users. Pegasus is a ‘zero click’ mobile surveillance that has extensive data-collection capabilities. It can read texts and emails, monitor app usage, track location data, and access a device’s microphone and camera. It is designed to gain access to devices, without the knowledge of users, and gather personal information and relay it back to whomever it is that is using the software to spy.
1 Pegasus was developed by the Israeli firm NSO Group that was set up in 2010 to combat terror and crime around the world but it had an inverse effect and became the most powerful cyber weapon which mainly targeted influential people in the spheres of journalism, politics, civil services etc. 2 Initially, Pegasus spyware would access information from the user by sending them a malicious link by clicking on which the user’s device would become a surveillance device for the users. This was known as spear-phishing and was discovered by scientists in 2016. Ever since it was discovered, the NSO team worked on making it a ‘zero-click’ surveillance which would not require any sort of inquiry or interaction with the users in order to infiltrate their devices and eventually became successful.
The NSO Group is an Israeli cyber-arms company that created Pegasus and supplies it to the governments of different countries around the world and many of these governments use it as surveillance devices on their citizens and violates their privacy which is a basic human right 1 Gaurav Kumar, ‘ An analysis of the Pegasus Spyware Issue in The Light of Surveillance Laws and Right to Privacy in India’, Jus Corpus Law Journal, Ayush Pandey, 2nd April 2022, https://heinonline. org/HOL/LandingPage? handle=hein. journals/juscrp2&div=370&id=&page=
2 Id
and is also guaranteed under article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 3 SPECULATION OF PEGASUS SPYWARE IN INDIA It was in July 2021 that the speculation of the use of Pegasus spyware in India came into light and eventually questions were raised to the government as to the use of the same. The Indian government denied all the allegations before them regarding the issue but various influential people in the spheres of journalism, business, civil services and politics were not satisfied. They further claimed that the government needs to support their claims with facts and evidences which were not provided by the government thereafter. The Indian citizens stated that it was violative of their fundamental right i. e. the right to privacy guaranteed to each and every citizen of the country under article 21 of the Indian constitution.
4 The Supreme Court of India has interpreted this right to include the right to privacy as well. The right to privacy has been recognized as an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 after the Puttaswamy case5 wherein it was affirmed by the nine judge bench of supreme court affirmed that the right to privacy is a fundamental right that is intrinsic to the right to life and personal liberty. The Court held that privacy is a natural right that inheres in every individual and is necessary for the development of the human personality. The Supreme Court mainly took into consideration the protection of privacy of the individuals in a digital age. EFFORTS MADE TO TACKLE THE PEGASUS ISSUE IN INDIA As there were lots of questions raised to the government, there were petitions filed before the courts.
The most prominent judgment in the Pegasus issue was the 2021 case of Manohar Lal v Union of India6 wherein the matter was heard before the Supreme Court and was concluded on the basis of a lack of facts. The Union of India maintained a stand through various ministers such as the electronic minister, and the ministry of Railways conveyed that the reports published related to Pegasus are manipulated and have no factual basis and for that reason, it could not be considered as an authentic source. The Supreme Court, while taking into consideration the government’s stand, stated that there were around 300 people in certain fields who have been complaining regarding this issue and it cannot be ignored completely. Hence,
3 ‘Universal Declaration of Human Declaration’, Article 12,1948
4 The Indian Constitution, Article 21, 1950
5 K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. vs. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1
6 Manohar Lal v Union of India (2021)
the court-appointed an expert committee with minimum biases to investigate the issue and report accordingly. This was done as the Union of India claimed that no such device was bought by them but had no or minimum facts and evidences to support their claims. The same case was with the petitioner’s side as well. Their records and reports were not completely reliable and therefore could not be seen as an authentic source of evidence. There are also a lot of debates and discussions going around regarding the amendment of the Information Technology Act of 20007 as there are no provisions to safeguard the private information of the people from others and the offenses covered under the act need to have stricter punishments.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, the use of Pegasus, without the targets' knowledge or consent, appears to be a violation of their right to privacy. Moreover, the fact that the targets were critical of the government raises questions about the legitimacy of the state interest. The government's denial of any involvement in the use of Pegasus does not absolve it of its responsibility to protect the right to privacy. The Pegasus issue in India raises serious concerns about the right to privacy and the abuse of State power. The legal precedents established in the Puttaswamy and Manohar Lal cases recognize the importance of privacy as a fundamental right and the state's obligation to protect it.
7 Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, 2000