Pegasus case: Supreme Court says, serious matter, if news reports are correct

The Supreme Court of India observed today that if the news reports are correct, the allegations about the Central Government using Israeli software to spy on people is a serious issue.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India N V Ramana and Justice Surya Kant was hearing several petitions in connection with the Pegasus spyware case.

During the course of the hearing, the Bench asked’ “We want to ask some questions. No doubt the allegations are serious if reports in newspapers are correct. The majority of petitions rely on foreign newspapers, but is there any verifiable material for us to order an inquiry?”

The petitioners are seeking a court-monitored probe into the reports of Pegasus being used by the government to spy on people from different walks of life.

The judges asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for senior journalists N Ram and Sashi Kumar, why was the petition filed suddenly now, when in 2019 reports had surfaced that Pegasus software had been used to penetrate Whatsapp.

Sibal stated that Pegasus is a "rogue technology, which enters our lives without our knowledge and it surveys every moment”. "It penetrates into our national internet backbone. It is an assault on privacy, dignity and values of our republic," he said.

Sibal pointed out that the spyware is sold only to government agencies and can't be sold to private entities. He further argued that journalists, public figures, constitutional authorities, court officers, academics all are targeted by spyware. "The government has to answer who purchased it? How much was spent? Where was the hardware placed? Why did the government not register the FIR, it's a matter of our privacy? Only the government will be able to tell us facts," he said.

He added, "This morning we came to know that registrars serving in this court and an old number of a member of the judiciary is also mentioned in the list of spyware. Pegasus can even take photos and videos. That means if I move around in my private moments, they can watch me, they can activate my camera, my microphone."

When a similar query was put to senior advocate C U Singh, who appeared for some other petitions, he replied that the names of the people who were targeted were not known in 2019 and that the names had surfaced now.

Another senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, who appeared for Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CIPM) Member of Parliament John Brittas, informed the Court that the issue of surveillance was raised in the Parliament in November 2019 and the then Minister for Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad had replied that there was no unauthorised interception of calls.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi appearing for journalist SNM Abdi referred to media reports about forensic examinations suggesting surveillance of his phone. He argued that "As regards filing complaints, this is a matter of very wide dimensions. This is not a case of an individual's phone being bugged, it is mass action. It is a case where the government of India should have taken action on its own." Dwivedi further contended that a news report confirmed at least 40 journalists were targets or potential targets. "This is a larger issue involving constitutionality and not just criminality. Ordinary individuals who are writing on issues that concern the government cannot be subjected to surveillance."

The Bench then asked the petitioners to serve a copy of their petitions to the Central government's law officers and it would take up the matter. It said that without the Central government present in the hearing, the bench cannot proceed as of now.