-The Hindu Legal researcher Usha Ramanathan speaks about the the modified draft Bill which continues to raise several critical concerns relating to privacy, ethical usage of DNA samples and DNA database. This week, the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) uploaded a slightly modified draft of the Human DNA Profiling Bill on its website, opening up the controversial Bill, now tabled in Parliament, for public scrutiny. Legal researcher Usha Ramanathan, a member of the Committee...

-The Indian Express The challenge to the Aadhaar project is, of course, much more than privacy. Much, much more.  The three-judge bench of the Supreme Court hearing the cases challenging the UID/Aadhaar project has decided that there “appears to be certain amount of apparent unresolved contradiction in the law declared by this Court” in relation to privacy as a fundamental right. It worries the court that reading the 1954 judgment in MP Sharma’s...

-The Hindu The Attorney General’s argument questioning the right of Indians to privacy is wrong on two counts. But worse, it goes against the interests of the people on every count. The last ten days have spelt dark times for the right to privacy. On one hand, the DNA Profiling Bill, which may result in a database of sensitive personal data with little to prevent its misuse, is being tabled in Parliament....

-Scroll.in A bill proposes creation of a national DNA data bank, without requisite safeguards for privacy, and opens the information to everything from civic disputes to compilation of statistics. On Wednesday, the Narendra Modi government told the Supreme Court that India's citizen's have no fundamental right to privacy. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi referred to a 1950 court verdict which held that the right to privacy was not a fundamental right while defending...

-The Times of India NEW DELHI: The NDA government on Thursday cited a six-decade old ruling of the Supreme Court to argue that citizens could not claim right to privacy as a fundamental right, a stand which could raise the hackles of civil rights groups. The argument, advanced by attorney general Mukul Rohatgi, ran contrary to many post-Emergency judgments of the Supreme Court expanding the right to life, guaranteed under Article 21...