Pegasus case: SC issues pre-admission notice to Centre on pleas seeking independent probe
[ad_1]
Bench says it will consider the further course of action, including the formation of a committee to inquire into the allegations, in due time.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued pre-admission notice to the Centre on petitions seeking an independent inquiry into allegations that the government used Israeli-based Pegasus spyware to snoop on journalists, activists, dissenters, parliamentarians, Ministers and other citizens.
After issuing notice, a Bench of Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose said it would consider the further course of action, including the formation of a committee to inquire into the allegations, in due time. The court listed the case for hearing after 10 days.
Also read | Allegations of snooping using Pegasus mere ‘conjectures and surmises’: Government
The notice was issued after the government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, stood firm by its two-page affidavit denying “all and any” allegations. Mr. Mehta said any revelation about any software allegedly used by government to counter terrorism would compromise national security.
“They [petitioners] want us to say whether Pegasus was used or not… It is nobody’s case that interception is done by governments for the purpose of national security. Softwares are used… They want to know which software is used… No government will say which software is used because if we divulge, terrorists may take advantage. Which software is used or not is a matter of national security. It cannot be a matter of public debate,” Mr. Mehta made the opening statement at the start of the virtual hearing.
The Solicitor General clarified that the government is not refusing to reveal anything to anybody at all. “We are just saying we will not reveal it publicly,” Mr. Mehta said.
He referred to the affidavit filed by the government which agreed to the formation of a Committee of Experts to inquire into the reports of Pegasus snooping.
Also read | Pegasus case: Govindacharya asks Supreme Court to revive his 2019 petition
“As a responsible government, we are submitting that we will form a committee of neutral experts, whose report will be placed before the Supreme Court… I repeat, it is not my case that I will not divulge anything. All will be revealed before the committee… Let me do that before a committee… Permit us to form a committee… We will place its report before the Supreme Court itself,” Mr. Mehta urged the court.
Justice Kant said there was no question of compromising national security.
“We are not going to ask you to divulge anything that will harm the defence of the nation… We are extremely reluctant to say anything on that. But the question here is that there are some persons of eminence who have come here, saying there has been interception of their phones… That can be done, but with the permission of the competent authority… So, we are issuing simple notice… Competent authority can say to what extent what can be done or what decision is to be taken,” Justice Kant explained.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for veteran journalists N. Ram and Sashi Kumar, said “the security of the State is as important to the citizen as it is to the State”.
On Monday, Mr. Sibal had rebutted the affidavit on five points. One, he said it was filed by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and not the Ministry of Home Affairs which authorised surveillance under the law. Secondly, the affidavit skipped the part on whether the government or its agencies used Pegasus at all. Thirdly, he said if the government did not get the time to study the petitions and reply to them, then the court should give them the time. Fourthly, the senior lawyer countered that the affidavit did not even say whether the “facts and contentions” in the petitions were right or wrong.
“Finally, and most importantly, we do not want a government who might have used Pegasus to form a Committee of Experts to inquire into the issue. As far as I am concerned, the issue is simple. If the government says they have used the Pegasus, there is no need for a committee. If the government says they have not used the Pegasus, then too, there is no need for a committee,” Mr. Sibal had reasoned.
Mr. Mehta had explained that the offer to form a Committee of Experts was a “bona fide gesture” from the government to clear the air. The law officer had invited the Supreme Court to frame the terms of reference of the committee.
[ad_2]
