Determination of the freedom of a speech

Sebastian Douglas once said, “Nothing in this world is free” and now it is said and practiced by everyone. So, is Free Speech, free? The act of exercising Free Speech is protected under the Indian Constitution, and Douglas’ idiom fits perfectly even in this case. The said fundamental right is not absolute in nature and needs to be read with certain exceptions. These exceptions are prudently drawn situations through which a legal line is drawn by the legislation as to how far you can practice your free speech. The exceptions stipulate that exercise of this right shall not be at the expense of affecting operation of any existing law, or preventing the State from making any law thereof. Thus, reasonable restrictions are imposed in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. If a “speech” resorts to any of the above-mentioned restrictions, it cannot qualify for protection. However, there is an evident vagueness when you ask the question, “How do you identify a speech to be acting in a way which attracts the above-mentioned restrictions? The recent not-so-heavy penalty inflicted on Prashant Bhushan for advocating his opinions via world’s most preferred opinion board, Twitter, may answer our question .

We live in a world of perceptions and more so a world of people who want to advocate their perceptions. Taking an example of decency, there is always an issue as to how does one concretise decency in this rapidly growing world and thus consider a publication or an act to be indecent in nature and thereby attract censorship. There is a competing fundamental right to speech involved here which cannot be undermined. If a content is obscene enough to pollute the minds of the viewers or even impart a message which is likely to act against the public interest, it is regarded as indecent or obscene as the case may be. Even during the course of evaluation of breach of privacy, there is a competing national interest involved and sometimes even in the nature of freedom of speech. A publication house publishing a content about an individual may invite a privacy suit. Having said that, the presence of a competing freedom of speech in favour of the publishing house cannot be disregarded. Similarly, the case of Prashant Bhushan vocalising his opinion on controversy board, Twitter and exercising his free speech was declared as a contempt considering it was a “malicious, scurrilous, calculated attack” on the institution of administration of justice. The competing Free Speech in this case in favour of the Advocate was observed by the court whilst passing the decision.

The court observes the test of doctrine of proportionality whilst dealing with competing rights involved. Often regarded as the balancing exercise, the doctrine of proportionality explains that the exercise and protection of the rights shall be in proportion to the public interest. In the Bhushan case, the free speech of the civil rights advocate was held guilty for contempt on the grounds of exercising a speech which was against the Judiciary. Thus, the issue involved was to protect the free speech in proportion to the public interest involved. Constitution of India prohibits any speech towards protection which amounts to contempt. The application of the doctrine is upon case to case basis, that is to say that there is no standard format to be complied with to reach the conclusion. The random approach applied here is an easy ticket to conceive several precedents of the same nature of debarring free speech, if not laid down in a consistent manner.

Thus, the only concern arising is a need for a specific framework whilst weighing the fundamental rights which otherwise will increase the dependence on the precedents to draw judgements. The issue with a sole reliance on precedents is to declare judgments of the similar nature thus depriving the citizens of fundamental right. Hence, even though the order is of penalty of merely a shining one-rupee coin, there is a big concern of the judgement acting as a harmful precedent and thus likely to debar the exercise of free speech to a great extent.

Congress Clueless ?

It is strange Congress has no sense of history.

After independence British suzerainty ended. Native states were free to accede to either India or Pakistan depending upon geographical contiguity. Despite being surrounded by India, Junagadh Nawab announced accession to Pakistan. A public outrage against Nawab and formation of Arzi Hakumat under Shamaldas Gandhi overthrew Nawab who fled to Pakistan. Junagadh acceded to India. After accession Sardar Patel visited Junagadh and was given a rousing welcome.

In his address Sardar Patel promised to reconstruct Somnath Temple and reinstall historic Jyotirlinga. In 1947 cabinet approved reconstruction of the temple despite Nehru’s strong opposition. Dr. K M Munshi, a minister in Nehru’s cabinet, was given the task of executing the project. When Gandhiji was approached for his blessings, he welcomed the idea but on condition that it must be done by raising money from public, not by government funding. Sardar readily agreed.

Sardar Patel was to inaugurate the reconstructed temple. But unfortunately, he expired in 1950 and Gandhiji was assassinated in 1948. After the demise of these two stalwarts, Pandit Nehru became more forthright. After a cabinet meeting he called Munshi and reiterated: “I do not like your trying to restore Somnath.  It is Hindu revivalism.” Munshi did not immediately respond but wrote a letter to Nehru, some portion of which, is reproduced below, from his book “Pilgrimage to Freedom”

“Yesterday you referred to Hindu revivalism. You pointedly referred to me in the Cabinet as connected with Somnath. I am glad you did so; for I do not want to keep back any part of my views or activities. I can assure you that the ‘Collective Subconscious’ of India today is happier with the scheme of reconstruction of Somnath sponsored by the Government of India than with many other things that we have done and are doing.

The intention to throw open the temple to harijans has evoked some criticism from the orthodox section of the Hindu community…….. However, the objects of the Trust Deed make it clear that the temple is not only to be open to all classes of the Hindu community, but, according to the tradition of the old temple of Somnath, also to non-Hindu visitors.

It is my faith in our past which has given me the strength to work in the present and to look forward to our future. I cannot value India’s freedom if it deprives us of the Bhagavad Gita or uproots our millions from the faith with which they look upon our temples and thereby destroys the texture of our lives.  I have been given the privilege of seeing my incessant dream of Somnath reconstruction come true. That makes me feel – makes me almost sure – that this shrine once restored to a place of importance in our life will give to our people a purer conception of religion and a more vivid consciousness of our strength, so vital in these days of freedom and its trials.”

When Somnath temple was ready, Munshi invited president Dr. Rajendra Prasad to inaugurate.

Although fully aware of opposition of the prime minister, he agreed. When Nehru came to know, he wrote to the president: “I do not like your associating yourself with a spectacular opening of the Somnath temple”. It is history that president did inaugurate reconstructed temple. He said, he would inaugurate a mosque or church if invited to do so.

Nehru wrote to chief ministers that GOI has nothing to do with the installation ceremony and those attending the function are doing so in their personal capacities. He asked information and broadcasting minister to tone down  description of the ceremony in radio broad cast.

One thing, however, must be said about Nehru. He did not do this to humiliate Hindus or pamper Muslims. He honestly believed that partition wounds had still not healed and lots of innocent Muslims who decided to stay in India had nothing to do with Muhammad Gazni who demolished Jyotirlinga and looted Somnath temple in 1024. He was worried that partition riots were fresh, and this might lead to communal unrest. However, as we know, nothing of the sort happened. Millions of Hindus whose faith was not shaken and continued to visit the dilapidated temple felt a sense of closure and got over the bitter feelings over destruction of the temple.

Post-independence congress was jam-packed with opportunists who joined congress only for getting power. Instead of looking upon both communities with equanimity congress started wooing Muslims as a vote bank. Not only this, under the pretext of misconceived secularism it started bashing majority community so much so that Hindus were looked down upon and made to feel guilty.

This perverse attitude of congress created the political space for a strong Hindu back lash. The simmering angst of the majority community found its vent after thirty years when  seasoned politician L K Advani felt the pulse of the people and converted it into a strong political force by leading Rathyatra from Somnath to Ayodhya which, in fact, catapulted Bhartiya Janata Party into unbridled power at the center.

Congress still vacillated. It stuck to its notion of confused secularism and continued to ignore the majority community. Much later when it’s vote base started shrinking, it realized that it had estranged majority community. It started quick-fix – ‘Soft Hindutva’.  Top leaders did puja in temples including Somnath.  But it was too late, too little. Add to this, congress stalled the Ayodhya issue and impeded resolution of the mater when it came up before the Supreme Court. Even after the Supreme Court gave a clear verdict paving the way for construction of temple at Ayodhya it continued its opposition to construction of the temple.

 It was only when groundbreaking ceremony was announced that they saw it politically unwise to oppose and accepted Ram Mandir as a fait accompli. When Modi said in his erudite speech that Ram is not a Hindu God, but is revered in the whole country and in many countries world over, congress leaders retracted their utterances condemning construction of the temple by taking a complete about turn.

I am reminded of the words of Sadguru in one of his discourses that Ram’s life was a continuous disaster. A prince coronated  – sent to jungle – accompanied by his wife, a princess – not used to harsh jungle life – wife is kidnapped – goes all the way from Ayodhya to Lanka – rescues her and goes home – she is pregnant – some politics and she is sent to jungle – she gives birth to two boys – he does not know – in the battle he would have almost killed his sons not knowing who they were – Sita died and Ram never met her again – Ram’s life was a super failure not a super success – but we worship him because in spite all the disasters, he did not lose his calm, poise,  was not angry or hateful.  He was peaceful and never gave up values and ethics. He was untouched and unperturbed. We bow down to these great qualities of Ram. He was a true Maryada Purshottam. This is ingrained in the Indian psyche.

Political management by congress of the bulk of the people consisting of Hindus lacked foresight. The aspirations of the majority community were just ignored. They were treated as second class citizens. This silent wound was opened wide when BJP proclaimed as one of its clarion calls during elections: Proudly say “I am a Hindu”. Congress was and still is clueless. Rampant corruption was, of course, one of the factors which dried up the congress base. But it started losing support amongst a large majority of Hinds who are not only not communal but secular in the true sense of the term. Congress shooed them away. Bhartiya Janata Party was quick to fill the vacuum. Most of the Hindus, who were congress sympathizers earlier, thought it wiser to support BJP. No wonder, the GOP having 364 members in the first Lok Sabha was reduced to only 52 (2 short even for post of leader of opposition) in the current Lok Sabha and BJP which had hardly any significant presence in Lok Sabha in its initial years shot up to 303.

Series of wake-up calls for the GOP. Unless there is a metamorphosis in its approach and radical change in leadership, dissociated from Nehru-Gandhi family, it will soon become extinct.

China has always been an enigma to Indian politicos.

After independence Pandit Nehru conceived Panchsheel, five principles of mutual co-existence as the basis of relations with China and enshrined as preamble in the treaty with China in 1954. This led to slogan “Hindi-Chini-bhai-bhai”. But later, it seems, Nehru was disillusioned about China.

Four years before1962 war, Nehru considered China “arrogant, devious, hypocritical and thoroughly unreliable” and advised his envoy to the country to bypass the then defense minister Krishna Menon in all communications from Beijing as his thinking on China was “clouded” due to his Communist background. The diary of G Parthasarathy, India’s ambassador to China in 1958 has revealed Indian premier was extremely wary of the country and thought that Beijing had “deliberately chosen to be anti-Indian”.

Notes made by Parthasarathy reveal that Nehru did not trust the country despite the Panchsheel agreement. The notes were made after the late diplomat met Nehru for a briefing prior to his assignment in China in 1958. “So, GP, when has the foreign office told you Hindi-Chini-bhai-bhai? Don’t you believe it. I don’t trust the Chinese one bit, despite Panchsheel and all that. The Chinese are arrogant, devious, hypocritical and thoroughly unreliable,” the diary entry says, quoting Nehru during the meeting on March 18, 1958.

Nehru was dismayed at China’s deliberate policy of hurting Indian interests despite India being the first to recognize communist China as the real republic of China and not Taiwan contrary to position of rest of the countries. It was Nehru who suggested that the permanent seat on UNSC held by Taiwan be offered to China when the same was offered to India

Congress leader and former UN Under-Secretary General Shashi Tharoor said in an interview in 2004 that Nehru “declined a US offer” to India to take a permanent seat at the UNSC in 1953, and said China be given the seat instead. Even in his book ‘Nehru – The Invention of India’, Tharoor writes that Nehru suggested the seat, held by Taiwan till then, be offered to Beijing. Nehru was reportedly known to have said that “the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan.” Further, a March 2015 report by historian Anton Harder titled ‘Not at the Cost of China’ shows that the US had begun mounting pressure on India for a permanent seat as early as 1950, wanting her to take the place of m

China. Harder acknowledges that “integrating PRC into the international community by conceding to China’s right to the seat” was in fact the “central pillar of Nehru’s foreign policy.” A 2002 Frontline article by historian AG Noorani on the ‘Nehruvian Approach’ also cited a 1955 note written by Nehru on the US and Russian offers to the UNSC. In this note, Nehru had acknowledged that suggestions were made by the US “informally”, but India was not anxious to enter the Security Council at that stage

I think Nehru’s opinion of China, after a short lucid interlude, underwent a sea change in view of the hard facts of China’s machinations against Indian interests. However, it is strange that although Nehru did not trust China and was repeatedly cautioned by army chiefs Gen. Cariappa and Gen.Thimmayya about the likely attack from China, he just ignored the threats so much so that he ridiculed Gen. Thimmayya : “It is not for the army to decide who the nation’s enemies will be.”  As late as 2012 Gen, V.K.Singh, the then army chief informed the defense minister and warned in a letter to  PM Man Mohan Singh that most of the military hardware was obsolete and in a critical condition. Their advice was ignored by successive governments.

Finally, I think, the hard lesson is learnt. Now, the government and the prime minister have decided not only to take military’s advice seriously but also to give it a free hand.

China’s relations with India must be viewed in the context of this historical perspective.

Border Disputes

There are several strategic points on the LAC, temporary demarcation of the status quo along the disputed border with the Himalayan neighbour at which China has been claiming territories controlled by India. It has unilaterally tried to alter the status quo by pushing India and grabbing territories on Indian side. Border conflicts can be ascribed to this undermarketed border. China does not recognize the McMahon Line which was drawn by the British between Tibet (now a part of China) and India. Notwithstanding the temporary truce China will continue to use force to press its claims along the LAC.

Sino Centric World Orderł

But the greatest challenge from China emanates from its ambition to have a Sino Centric Word Order. For achieving this dream, it has started cajoling or pressurizing its neighbors with whom it has border disputes. One such big area of dispute is South China Sea. China claims many islands in South China Sea and has constructed artificial islands to use as bases. It claims ownership of South China Sea overriding the claims of Brunei, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines and international community over sea lanes through which bulk of international trade moves. It has started bellicose advances in Indian ocean and started cultivating India’s neighbours like Shri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh.

Belt and Road project is another initiative to consolidate its power in South East Asia. India has maintained that Beijing’s BRI project undermines India’s sovereignty as CPEC, a part of it, runs through the disputed territory of Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

In its master plan China faces strong opposition from India which is emerging as a force to be reckoned with. India, being conscious of the ulterior intentions of China, has set in motion processes to check-mate China by aligning with countries adversely affected by Chinese expansionist policy.  Malabar Naval Exercises under QUAD by India, US, Japan and Australia is one such move.

China’s military move along the LAC is to be seen in the context of this overall scenario. China is messaging India that it must desist being an irritant in the Chinese devious objective of establishing its hegemony in Asia and later building a Sino Centric world order.

India now is not what it was in 1962. It has modernized its weaponry and increased its military strength substantially. Indian economy is comparatively stronger and more resilient. Above all, it has a democratically elected strong leadership having overwhelming support of its people, not to be brow beaten by Chinese belligerence. This was clear in the strong Indian retaliation and show of strength during face-off at Dhokalam and lately in Galvan Valley in Ladakh.

Corona Endemic

Another dimension is China’s complete isolation consequent to its deceitful suppression of information on corona virus causing death of millions around the world and maiming world economy. International community suspects that China knew this as early as November 2019. It is accused to have compromised WHO.

Story of China is not still over and demands our serious attention. On the one hand it apparently agrees to be peaceful and restore status quo ante but, on the ground, it is reluctant to withdraw its army.

China’s Indian policy has three objectives : (i) to put continued military pressure all along the LAC  (ii) to destabilize Indian economy by dumping cheap consumer goods and intermediates for Indian Industries, thus killing indigenous industries. and (iii) to befriend India’s neighbours and encourage them to be anti-India. Bold moves of Atma Nirbhar Bharat and ban on 59 Chinese apps have shaken China as could be seen from its strong outbursts against both.

Pandit Nehru was right. China is devious, unreliable and anti-Indian. But unlike him, we must wake up before it is too late. We must rejuvenate our economy, reinforce military capability, intelligence gathering and cyberoperations to surpass the dragon. We should increase our outreach to countries opposed to Chinese aggressive designs, cultivate closer relations with friendly neighbours like Bangladeshi Shri-Lanka and Nepal. We should take forthright positions on issues against Chinese interests like Hong Cong, Taiwan, atrocities on Rohingyas, Tibetan Buddhists and Christians.

Of course, we must not be averse to negotiate on disputes. But we must negotiate from a position of strength and finally tell China bluntly that, as John Fitzgerald Kennedy said, “We cannot negotiate with people who say what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable.”

Introduction

With the eruption of Covid-19 pandemic, the physical world is at stand still. The online platform has taken a new course and has been filling the lack of physical contact. Technology dependency has also increased immensely. To overcome this unprecedented outbreak, government from all the countries are taking effective measures. India has been ahead of the curve by announcing a county wide lockdown before the virus started showing its ill effects. One of the steps taken by the Government was to introduce the Arogya Setu App (Bridge to Healthcare) (Herein referred as ASA). It aims at bringing the citizens of the country together to combat this fearful virus and parallelly monitor the contact tracing and declare effective steps accordingly. In all fairness, it is a great initiative by government but the privacy loopholes that the app is accountable for cannot be disregarded.

Aim and Objective

A huge population being very close to the poverty line is one of the many disadvantageous aspects that India has to juggle along with this wide spread disease. International organisations like the World Health Organisation (WHO) have articulated four key pillars as the ‘backbone’ of effective response strategies; namely testing, isolation, tracing and Treatment^[1]. The ASA revolves around the third pillar of this response strategy i.e. Tracing.  

Contact tracing basically means to control the speed of spread. It is one of the most effective methods to break the vicious chain and identify the hotspots which can ultimately lead to optimum usage of the limited health supplies. 

The app is designed so as to monitor the same contact tracing for it is the most effective tool to prevent further spreading of the disease. The users self-assess for if they have any Covid-19 symptoms as declared by those who are already affected. The main feature of the app is that it alerts the users if they come in vicinity of an infected person and it is followed by what precautionary steps they need to undertake. 

How it works?

The app once downloaded guides the user with the aim and purpose of it and the information it will provide the user. The user needs to add its mobile phone number, name age, gender, profession, travel history and known contact with an infected patient, if any. The terms of service^[2] of the app declares that when accepting the terms for usage we agree for usage of GPS and Bluetooth services which can be turned on/off upon the discretion of the user. The app requests the user for accessing the GPS and Bluetooth feature so as to effectively monitor the location and contact traces of the user and ultimately notify him in case he comes in the radius of an infected person. This is achieved through data sharing between devices when they are in each other’s proximity. 

For example, In case ‘x’ is tested positive for COVID-19, The Government will inform all those users ‘x’ has come in contact with over past 30 days considering they have the risk of being infected and ultimately being carriers of the virus. Similarly, a person will also be notified if he was in vicinity of another infected individual. 

Privacy concerns

Micheal Ryan, executive Director of the World Health Organization’s Health emergencies programme said, 

“We do always have to have in the back of our minds, especially when it comes to collecting information on individual citizens or tracking their whereabouts or movements, that there are always very serious data protection implications.” ^[3]

Even before the app was built, In ​India​, there was case wherein state government had uploaded PDF files online with names, house addresses, and travel history of people ordered into COVID-19 quarantines.^[4].  This was a method of combating the pandemic on the leverage of major invasion of privacy of individual. Similarly, the app also attracts several privacy loopholes. The biggest concern with the app was that it can lead on to become a central source of information from being a mere contact tracing app. 

India suffers from a massive disadvantage of lack of a Personal data protection framework. However, even in times of extremities like these governments interventions which restricts people’s privacy against the rule of law, the case law KS Puttaswamy (Retd) and Anr v Union of India^[5] holds a substantial relevance. The case declares that Right to Privacy shall extend towards the privacy of personal data. The judgement declares that during the times of epidemic or national health crisis, the data shall meet the “anonymity” principle. This means that in spite of not attracting the usual privacy concerns, the data needs to be undertaken with the same secured manner and practices towards anonymisation shall not be compromised. Thus, the data needs to undergo and fulfil the below mentioned criteria:

1. obtained through a legal regime, 
2. obtained for a necessary purpose, 
3. otained in manner where the restriction is proportionate and
4.  Effective safeguards to prevent potential abuse of data^[6]. 

The necessity and proportionality requirement mandates that the procurement of data must have a legitimate purpose for which it was collected. It must be proportionate with the purpose for which it was collected. On entering the app, the app asks the user to feed in the personal details like mobile phone number, name age, gender, profession, travel history and known contact with an infect patient. It is important to see that all the data collected holds value. In our case this accounts for too much information and acts against the necessity and proportionality principle of data collection thus deviating from the primary purpose that is situational awareness. 

The app functions on multiple data points i.e. the GPS and Bluetooth. Arguably, GPS can provide with higher accuracy however there is no point in tracking the location wherein the infection was spread weeks ago for it doesn’t satisfy the purpose. Moreover, they are the reason for overtly compromising people’s privacy. Obtaining the location of infected person at that very moment so as to give him necessary instructions makes more sense. For the same, mere phone number and Bluetooth of the infected person shall suffice and any detail which the app collects on top of that holds no value. The most concerning issue in collection through multiple point is that this app which is designed for health surveillance can lead to Mass Surveillance.

Furthermore, the said data collected is saved on both the device and on central servers.  The Terms of service^[7] of the app establish that the time stamped records of the user contact will be deleted in 30 days but not anonymized and aggregated datasets. The vagueness of the Terms of service establish that the encrypted user data can last beyond the purpose of tracing corona virus and ultimately become a raw material for mass surveillance by the Government. This conflicts with the purpose principle of collection of data which says that the data collected should be used only for the declared purpose for which it was collected, in our case, contact tracing.

 In ASA, neither the source code nor the technical specifications are public and only privacy policy and terms of service are made public. This prevents any reverse engineering to the app which gives information of any end points within the app and how the data is being used. Thereby it also prevents ethical hackers and cybersecurity experts to test the system and locate the loopholes which can be actually fixed. 

The app uses static device ids that are vulnerable to sniffing attacks^[8]  which makes it easier for the hackers to hack the personal data as the app constants the device ids which are ultimately not encrypted nor they change overtime. Thus, making it prone to mass hacking experience which India has always been experiencing. 

The term of service of the app are vague which is the primary reason for the numerous privacy concerns which the app has been criticized upon instead of its noble purpose of stopping further spread. Regarding the retention of data under the privacy policy^[9] of the app  states that the information collected from the user  at the time of registration remains in the server and is retained for as long as your account remains in existence and for such period thereafter as required under any law for the time being in force. There is no mention of deletion or destruction of such data once the purpose is fulfilled, this leaves a room for manipulation of data and usage of data for further usage. This results into conflicting the principle of proportionality mentioned above which states that the data collected shall be proportional for the legitimate aim it was collected.

Lastly, the disruption clause in the Terms of service app^[10] states that the user shall not expect any permanent or uninterrupted access to the app as the app may be suspended permanently or temporarily with respect to all or some class of the people. This creates a mass room for the data which is still there in the server to be used beyond the purpose for which it was collected for innumerable time period. 

Contrary to the ASA, The Singapore app on contact tracing called Tracktogther app (TTA) collects mere phone number of the user and the said phone number is reflected on the server only when approached by the contact tracer by a central sever owned by Ministry of Health. TTA has proposed a data minimization principle which functions on a single data point, i.e. Bluetooth which as explained above is more acceptable form of giving them desired results which they are achieving.  The app has an open source code which is backed up by a tight server security. Through this we can keep a track of what data is collected though the app. Thus, any manipulation of the data can be detected and addressed which can lead to protection of data. Having said that, the app ASA app altogether is not a faulty attempt in itself if it follows the same privacy structure as TTA.

Conclusion

India’s attempt to combat this extraordinary virus is a great initiative provided the above-mentioned privacy loopholes are addressed and fixed. As discussed in the essay, the role of app in contact tracing opens up challenges to right to privacy under the constitution of India. The country lacks a data protection regulatory framework and nor has it reformed its surveillance framework i.e the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Information Technology Act, 2000 in line with the right to privacy^[11].  As per a recent report the central government is contemplating using the application as an e-pass to travel within the country^[12]Combine this with the fact that its riskassessments are done though unsupervised algorithms and we are looking at a template which mirrors China’s AliPay Health Code^[13]. Hence, if not paid heed immediately, current privacy structure the app can resort to mass surveillance by the government and can attract innumerable cybercrimes. 

---

^[1] Linda Lacina, WHO coronavirus briefing: Isolation, testing and tracing compromise the “backbone’ of response, World Economic Forum, March 2020,  https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/testing-tracing-backbone-who-coronavirus-wednesdays-briefing/

^[2] Aarogya Service TERMS OF SERVICE https://web.swaraksha.gov.in/ncv19/tnc/

^[3] World Health Organisation. ​COVID-19 virtual press conference – 25 March 2020. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press- conference-full-25mar2020.pdf 

^[4] Bangalore Mirror. Government publishes details of 19,240 home-quarantined people to keep a check, 2020. https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/others/government-publishes-details-of-19240-home-quara ntined-people-to-keep-a-check/articleshow/74807807.cms

^[5] Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs Union Of India on 26 September, 2018 [(2017) 10 SCC 1]

^[6]  Bhandari, V., Kak, A., Parsheera, S., & Rahman, F. (2017). An Analysis of Puttaswamy: The Supreme Court’s Privacy Verdict. IndraStra Global, 11, 1-5.

https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-54766-2 

^[7] Aarogya Service TERMS OF SERVICE https://web.swaraksha.gov.in/ncv19/tnc/

^[8] https://www.bloombergquint.com/coronavirus-outbreak/covid-19-how-the-aarogya-setu-app-handles-your-data

^[9] Aarogya Setu Privacy Policy  https://web.swaraksha.gov.in/ncv19/privacy/

^[10] Disruption Clause, Aarogya Setu Terms of service, 

https://web.swaraksha.gov.in/ncv19/tnc/

^[11] Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Information Technology Act, 2000

^[12] Sean McDonald, The Digital Response to the Outbreak of COVID-19 , Centre for International

Governance Innovation, March 2020,

https://www.cigionline.org/articles/digital-response-outbreak-covid-19 .

^[13] A combined interpretation of the ChinAI newsletter and a Google translation from Chinese

(simplified) to English of the original article. Any errors in interpretation are the author’s alone

America is the only country in the world which represents the dream of a true multicultural society, Successive American presidents nurtured this dream because they knew what fueled the phenomenal growth of the country. Immigrants constitute a small minority of the US population. But they are highly qualified in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and computer science. Over 60 % of Nobel Laureates in the US universities are immigrants. Silicon Valley the global center of technological innovation is manned by immigrants, about 50% of what venture capitalist Aileen Lee figuratively called Unicorns and 40 % of famous Fortune 500 companies were set up by immigrants or their children. Most of these immigrants came through the H1-B visa or L-1 route and are the ones who published papers, applied for patents and set up enterprises. This is the powerhouse that has made modern America. They have adopted America as their home for several generations.  It needs to be said that a very large component of these enterprising immigrants are Asians mostly of Indian origin. They are known as Indian Americans.

But there is another America, the white, nativist, rightist America consisting of white Americans not exposed to higher education. They consider themselves the original May Flower immigrants. In a country of immigrants, they consider themselves and their descendants as the natives, not the Red Indians, the true natives of the promised land.  Although greatly enriched by the economic miracle created by these ambitious, mostly Asian immigrants, these so-called natives detest them as ones who took away their jobs. Fact remains that they would never be eligible for these highly skilled jobs. They are jealous of their success stories and consider these nonwhite immigrants as invaders. Trump has cultivated this grievance and is supported by these nativists.

This is the dichotomy of American culture. To win election Trump antagonizes the very section of the population which catapulted the country into its trajectory of the most powerful country of the world. This is the arithmetic of his policy of banning several categories of visas through which talented immigrants came to USA and made USA their permanent home.

Trump has shielded his order under the cover of emergency created by corona virus on the ground that there is a colossal job loss to native Americans and it is necessary to temporarily ban these visas at least up to the end of 2020. But that is his election strategy. Once he is elected again for the second term, he will religiously stick to this ban to satisfy his constituency.

I think immigrants know this well and they have started searching other safe heavens wherein their talents are in great demand like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany. But this seems to be a short-sighted policy. Overall, it appears that globalization is at an end. Countries are reverting to their shells. Free movement of human beings across the world threatens to remain simply a utopian pipe dream.

We have started wooing foreign enterprises set up in China because they intend to shift from there. We have offered them all incentives. But Indian Americans are our own people. They will be only too eager to set up ventures in India if they are convinced that our old mind set has changed and they can build the same success stories here as in USA.

Why not convert this obstacle into an opportunity? Why not develop our own homeland into a land of unlimited opportunities? We have, fortunately, a political leader and government poised for taking advantage of such situations. We have one of the largest markets in the world and comparatively young and talented population. We need to educate our leaders to start processes by which we can initiate a reverse brain drain and convert our economy into a most prosperous world class economy. Having said this, I admit that the job is arduous but not impossible.

World is under great stress. Post corona epidemic China is completely isolated and is suspected to have concealed the data for a long time and is alleged to have been the cause of deaths of millions of people around the world. Economies of most of the countries, including USA, have nose-dived. USA has started withdrawing as the most powerful world leader. China is too eager to fill the vacuum and has started bullying its neighbors to accept its leadership.

India is no exception. Increasing impact of endemic, consequent slow down of economy, aggressive maneuvers of China, needling by small neighbors instigated by China and a large corona afflicted corona patients to look after in the face of sparse medical infrastructure are too much to be chewed by the governments at the center and states. Fortunately, there is unity in dealing with these problems and we have a strong leadership to address these problems.

There are several issues which crop up under such a scenario. For example, all international flights have come to a standstill. People who have left their countries and gone abroad for further studies, to meet relatives, for pleasure trips are all stranded. Special rescue flights are being organised by countries to bring home their citizens stranded abroad. First there is a scramble for these rescue flights and it is difficult to get listed. In case one gets the flight, there is apprehension of infection during the journey. One cannot meet the family on arrival – 14 days quarantine, 7 days institutional and 7 days home quarantine.

There are many people whose loved ones are still not able to reach them. They are dam scared about getting them listed and then of coming safe home without infection.

I want to narrate the actual experience of my grand daughter who had gone to London for further studies and was stranded because of the lock downs all around for the benefit of parents and close relatives all those who are still stranded abroad and crave to return home and be with their families. She returned thanks to Vande Mataram Rescue Flight of Air India. In her own words :

LHR-AHM

A Journey in Pandemic

I was going home bearing extreme excitement to meet my family back home in India, but truth be told it was overpowered by the fear of being infected whilst the journey. It started with filling up a form generated by High Commission a week before the flight was scheduled, i.e. 07^th June 2020. On filling up the form, there is no email conformation that you receive which generally leads to duplication of application as a cause of delusional mind who fears for form not being filled. Two days before the flight, I receive an email from High Commission stating I have been shortlisted. In the following two days my ticket is booked on the call with the most helpful and understanding staff of Air India. I have a record of goofing up during the most crucial times, but the team still assisted with utmost patience. The flight was London-Mumbai-Ahmedabad.  I was been constantly told that it is now that the real journey starts. On 7^th July 2020 I started my journey in Pandemic.

I reached Heathrow airport 4 hours prior to the flight as been instructed on the call by the staff and even in my E ticket. Much to my surprise or not, I wasn’t as early as I thought I would be. I was welcomed by around 70 odd individuals, queueing patiently. The trollies which held their last-minute packed bags by default helped in maintaining social distancing. I joined the line and joined the frantic + hopeful mask bearing faces. An announcement made 10 minutes after lit me up. “All the Business class passengers are supposed to directly go for check in” in their what I called “Privileged check-in counters”. I almost sprinted to the counter and finished all the formalities that followed like security etc, immediately. Before boarding the flight, you had to get your medical test done. On being passed the test, you will receive a stamp which will give you joy equivalent to a candy in a child’s hand. The economy passengers were given something which resembled a raincoat acting as a shield to avoid the physical contact with co-passengers. On entering the aircraft we were welcomed by the almost patented Air India “Namaste”. The only difference being that rather than the usual saree draped stewardess, there was a protective suit adorned individual. I entered the flight and looked right towards the economy class by the force of habit. The passengers in their protective suit sat next to each other, with no social distancing observed. I was asked to take a left to the business class, I have never felt more relived in taking a left turn in my life (including Metaphoric turns). There were two bags which were kept on my seat. One bag had refreshments and the other one had Safety gears like mask, shields etc. The flight took off on time. The journey was pretty smooth and sound. I had my mask on all the time and frequently sanitized my hands.

The flight first landed in Mumbai. The passengers who were traveling to Ahmedabad were asked to remain seated for the immigration formalities will be fulfilled in Ahmedabad itself. The cabin crew was changed and the ground staff cleaned and sanitised everything before the flight took off to Ahmedabad. In Ahmedabad, our handbags and cabin luggage were sprayed with sanitizers. The first thing to be done was to undergo a medical test, they check your temperature and submission of previously filled form stating your personal details in case of any health emergencies. On reaching the conveyor belt for luggage, I was highly impressed with the already arranged luggage trollies at a considerable distance to avoid the usual chaos that is observed. After claiming the luggage, we had to let the government individuals know where we would like to quarantine. The protocol by the government is that the travellers need to observe 7-day hotel quarantine and the following 7 days home quarantine. Moreover, the passengers are not supposed to quarantine in their home towns. Which is understandable looking at the previous experiences where people flee away exploiting their “strong connections”. Being aware of this protocol before I undertook the journey, my father had surveyed it well as to which hotels in our approved vicinity are good enough and accordingly it was booked for me on chargeable basis for 7 days. Bear in mind that the government gives quarantine facilities on a non-chargeable basis as well. A big bunch of people were segregated on the basis of their preferences and were taken to their destination in a Volvo AC bus.

We reached the hotel Neejanand and again all our bags were sanitized before we initiated the check-in procedures. Once checked in- we were narrated the house rules. The manager said and I quote, “Feel comfortable, feel home” and it was indeed like that. The food (Breakfast, lunch, High-tea and dinner) used to be delivered outside our rooms. This is how the day looked like:

 8:30 -First knock- Breakfast along with an Immunity Drink. (Always with a fruit)

11:00- Second Knock- Medical team and government officials used to come for medical test. Basically, they would check the temperature and ask if we had any symptoms.

12:00: The cleaning lady will ask if the room needed any cleaning

1:00 Lunch with wither Buttermilk or seasonal Mango pulp

4:30 Tea/coffee with Biscuits

8:30 Dinner

The quality of food was really good and varied. The mundane routine would be compensated with the variety of food they served every day. Moreover, we were given these homeopathy medicine which were to boost the immune system to be taken thrice a day.

I have few experiences during the stay which I would like to mention. On first day I figured that since the network wasn’t the best and hence internet connectivity was only WhatsApp friendly. There were few issues with the resort wifi which I asked them to fix. I told them that since I am a student I need to study and work and hence I will need internet. Next day I got the whole router being set up in my room for my personal use. The whole staff is at your service and helps you out with utmost care. There is nothing to worry.

Now I am at Home Sweet Home.

to