|
<<
^
>>
Date: 2000-05-26
IT-Ueberwachung im nahen Indien
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
Im fernen Indien zeigt eine in Verabschiedung befindliche IT-
Bill mit weitgehenden Befugnis/erweiterungen für die
gesetzlich ermächtigten Behörden, dass dieses Land
eigentlich sehr nahe liegt. Dass nur ein unabhängiges
Gericht bestimmen kann, ob grundlegende Bürgerrechte
aufgehoben werden, wird nah wie fern schon bald einer
Vergangenheit angehören.
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
relayed by
Martin Mair <mm@mediaweb.at>
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
WHILE the passage of the IT Bill has been widely welcomed,
the retention of clause 79 which empowers officers above
the rank of deputy superintendent of police to search and
arrest without a warrant if he reasonably suspects that an
offence has or is about to be committed has raised the
spectre of a police inspector raj. The government argues that
the criminal procedure code allows even a police constable to
search without a warrant. The IT industry is, thus, actually
better off since only senior police officers are involved. This
is, however, a little misleading because this power unde the
CrPC can be exercised only under certain specific
circumstances, whereas the wording of Section 79 is
disturbingly vague. `Reasonable suspicion is not defined.
The section also allows the police to enter and search if an
offence is ``about to be committed. This, too, has caused
concern. However, this part of the section could possibly be
justified on the ground that the police may be required to act
in response to, for instance, information that someone is in
the act of creating a virus. Unfortunately, the same cannot be
said about another part of Section 79 which says that
arrested individuals should be produced before a magistrate
``without undue delay. By not specifying a time frame for the
detention period, in the Indian context, this could well turn
out to be an open invitation to extortion by the police. Section
79 needs to be amended. It should be mandatory for the
officer to record reasons in writing for embarking on a search.
And except in exceptional circumstances, he needs to have
a warrant. The part conferring discretion on the police
regarding the length of the custody period also needs to be
scrapped. Again, the IT Bill is vague about the liabilities of
service providers. It would be absurd if a portal was to be
prosecuted because its search engine was used to find a
pornographic site. Presently, it is not clear whether or not
this is the case. While the Bill is a huge step forward
because it allows electronic contracts to be enforced,
amendments are needed to remove these glitches.
Source
http://www.economictimes.com/today/22edit01.htm
-.- -.-.
quintessenz wird dem/next auf einen eigenen Server
übersiedeln. Diese Tagline hilft uns dabei
http://www.fastbox.at
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
edited by Harkank
published on: 2000-05-26
comments to office@quintessenz.at
subscribe Newsletter
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.-
<<
^
>>
|
|
|
|