New Delhi: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Friday told the Delhi high court that video-recording of the ongoing Cockroach Janta Party-led protest against National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) paper leak at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi was in ‘legitimate state interest’ and any objection to it was ironic.
Responding to a public interest litigation (PIL) by former Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) president Aishe Ghosh against the Centre and the Delhi Police, alleging ‘continuous, indiscriminate and intrusive surveillance’ at the Jantar Mantar protest, Mehta said even influencers and other people from social media were making videos and taking interviews at the site, and the CJP itself has asked the protestors to ‘videograph everything’.
“It is ironic that they are claiming privacy in a public place. Police are conducting videography in legitimate state interest. It is necessary for security reasons,” SG Mehta stated.
Senior counsel Nandita Rao, appearing in the matter for the petitioner, however, asserted that the State action cannot be equated with the conduct of private individuals.
“Citizens are different. State is on a much higher pedestal,” Rao said, alleging that the protest site was under CCTV surveillance and private conversations of protesters were also being recorded.
As the senior counsel urged a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia to direct the Centre to file a response to the PIL, the bench said it would hear the case on July 27.
“There are issues and issues. We need to make up our mind first. We will have it on Monday,” the court said.
Rao, who asserted that the right to privacy is not surrendered in public spaces, raised concerns over the presence of police personnel in civil dress for video-recording and the alleged use of facial recognition technology by the police to identify protesters.
Referring to the Delhi Police’s standard operating procedure (SOP), she contended that a protocol was required to regulate the video-recording of protesters, including how long such content would be stored by the authorities.
On July 20, SG Mehta had said that video-recording of the protest at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi was not for ‘snooping’ but for law and order purposes, and that protests were always videographed.
Rao had argued that authorities were carrying out ‘intrusive’ surveillance of student protesters at Jantar Mantar, which is unsustainable in law.
The CJP has been holding the protest at Jantar Mantar since June 20, demanding Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation over alleged irregularities in examinations, including the NEET.
The PIL, filed through lawyer Subhash Chandran K R, has sought a declaration that ‘continuous and intrusive mass surveillance’ of peaceful protesters is constitutionally impermissible, disproportionate and cannot be justified under the guise of maintaining public order or national security.
It has sought a direction to authorities to forthwith suspend the mass photography, videography and surveillance at Jantar Mantar until there is a ‘proximate, real and imminent threat to public order’, justifying such measures.
‘The petitioner has in her possession photographs depicting the permanent surveillance tower and the continuous photography and videography undertaken by police personnel, which demonstrate the pervasive and intrusive nature of the surveillance being carried out by the respondents,’ the plea has said.
‘The surveillance is indiscriminate in nature, extending to every individual present at the protest site irrespective of any suspicion of unlawful conduct and encompassing not merely the public acts of protest but also the ordinary incidents of daily life, including eating, resting, seeking medical assistance and other personal activities,’ the plea has said.
