Right to Privacy vs National Security, Law and Order: A Comparative Study of Constitutional Provision of Nepal and India
In India Aadhaar Card- a 12 point digital number (biometric identification system) has become subject to controversy and partially welcomed and criticism from general public. A normal public poll suggests very significant percentage supporting the scheme of running government in order to justify a reasonable restriction in name of larger country security, law and order while other disfavors’ and criticize in name of Privacy clause of the constitution and direct control over free citizens. Right to privacy by nature is not absolute right for a constitutional expert and also for a law student which can invite justifiable and reasonable restrictions on it. Right to privacy is considered as one of pillar in democratic governance which keeps aspirations alive and also warns authority to confine within premises allowed by Constitutionalism of respective country. Nepal also is struggling to issue a similar digital card number for strict surveillance on citizens in order to avoid larger questions of law and order in country. The geo-political situation of Nepal is much more crucial in regards to India’s security concern and also Tibet stability as precondition for North relations. Both India and Nepal has made several joint efforts in name of country’s law and order for protecting unavoidable circumstances through not allowing right to privacy in absolute sense. The first section of research will make a comparative constitutional analysis of privacy clause of India and Nepal and strict surveillance of government.
By nature, state has an obligation to know about movement and involvement of its citizens in and out of country. A responsible state has also to refrain from interfering in ‘perceived notion of threat and feared psychology’ upon citizens in order to make them accommodated with democratic culture and rule of law. Nepal and India by Constitutional analysis shares larger similarities than differences in terms of availability of constitutional protection and provision not in terms of effectiveness of such clauses. Right to privacy is under ‘fundamental category’ which means nonviolability principles and indivisibility principle also attracts here. This section will illustrate the Supreme Court judgments and Court’s illustrations on digital card and privacy clause of Constitution of both the Nation.
The law and order is a mandatory act expected by any government and for which a public cooperation is must. Scholar support a reasonable restriction on right to privacy and also in number of UN Resolutions in respect to Privacy also share same information’s. This section will read the different Resolutions, Law, Treaties, Applications and jurisprudence of national security clause.
Methodology: Comparative and Analytical
Key words: Privacy, Constitutionalism and Rule of Law