Can a data privacy law protect individuals without making it harder for journalists to investigate them?
That question is at the centre of a challenge brought by Indian news publishers against the country’s digital privacy law.
Reuters reported on October 26 that a group representing 21 news publishers had filed a Supreme Court challenge on October 6. The publishers argue that provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act could interfere with investigative reporting and expose confidential sources.
Their predicted consequences are arguments made in the challenge. They are not findings by India’s Supreme Court. streetinsider.com
What the publishers say is at risk
The publishers argue that consent requirements could create obstacles when journalists investigate individuals who have no interest in cooperating.
They also raise concerns that requests to erase personal data could be used to seek the removal of published reporting. A further concern is that government demands for information could reveal journalists’ sources, according to Reuters’ account of the filing. streetinsider.com
The practical tension is clear: privacy protections often give individuals control over their personal information, while investigative reporting may depend on examining information without the subject’s permission.
The legal question is how the legislation addresses that tension - and whether its protections and exceptions are sufficient.
The challenge is still pending
The contested provisions are scheduled to take effect in May 2027. Reuters reported that the challenge was expected to be heard on October 27; a scheduled hearing does not guarantee that the Court will decide the case that day. streetinsider.com
For Canadian privacy, media and technology lawyers, the case offers a useful comparison. It raises questions about consent, deletion requests, regulatory access to information and the public interest in preserving reporting.
The outcome will depend on the Indian statute, the arguments before the Court and any reasons it eventually gives. The filing itself does not establish that the law requires the consequences the publishers predict.
Source: Reuters report on the publishers’ challenge
Related coverage: Clearview AI Appeal Tests How Far UK Privacy Law Reaches Overseas.