Supreme Court's Stance on National Security and Spyware

The Supreme Court of India emphasized the importance of national security, asserting that it cannot be compromised or sacrificed. The court acknowledged that possessing spyware for national security is acceptable, but the critical issue lies in its application. The discussion revolves around the use of Pegasus spyware, an Israeli-made tool, reportedly used to surveil journalists, activists, and politicians.

Judiciary's Perspective

• Justice Surya Kant's View: It is acceptable for a country to have spyware for security purposes, but misuse against individuals is concerning.
• Justice Kant stated that reports affecting national security should remain confidential, but individuals could be informed if they are targeted.
• The court addressed petitions filed after allegations on Pegasus, emphasizing the balance between security needs and individual privacy rights.

Government and Legal Responses

• Senior Advocate Dinesh Dwivedi highlighted the ongoing threat if the government possesses and uses spyware like Pegasus.
• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued against privacy rights for terrorists.
• Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal referred to a U.S. court judgment indicating India's involvement in Pegasus-related activities.

Justice R V Raveendran Committee Findings

• The committee, formed by the Supreme Court in October 2021, investigated the Pegasus allegations due to potential fundamental rights violations.
• In August 2022, the Supreme Court noted no conclusive evidence of Pegasus in the examined phones, though malware was found in five devices.
• The report faced non-cooperation from the government.

Future Proceedings

• Petitioners requested redacted copies of the committee's report.
• The Supreme Court scheduled the next hearing for July 30.