Govt cites national security, SC issues notice on Pegasus
On Monday, the government filed a three-page affidavit offering to set up an expert committee to look into all aspects of the controversy and “dispel any wrong narrative spread by certain vested interests”.
The Union government told the Supreme Court it has nothing to add to its affidavit on the Pegasus snooping matter filed on Monday that neither confirmed nor denied the use of the spyware to hack phones of ministers, politicians, businessmen, activists and journalists, following which the bench, headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, issued a formal notice to it on a clutch of petitions demanding a court-monitored independent investigation into the issue.
The court observed that it is “not averse” to the creation of an expert committee to look into the alleged surveillance of Indian citizens using the Israeli spyware – as suggested by the government – but that it expected the Union government to bring sufficient facts on record regarding the interception regime in India.
The government, however, maintained that any disclosure on its using or not using Pegasus spyware could affect national security, and reaffirmed its stand of divulging such information only to the proposed committee which, it added, can report to the top court.
In line with its response a day ago, the government said that all interceptions were being done in accordance with the statutory procedure and it would not wish to put out in public domain details of software used for lawful surveillance by filing any additional affidavit.
On Monday, the government filed a three-page affidavit offering to set up an expert committee to look into all aspects of the controversy and “dispel any wrong narrative spread by certain vested interests”. It further contended that the petitions “are based on conjectures and surmises or on other unsubstantiated media reports or incomplete or uncorroborated material” and, hence, failed to make out any case to invoke writ jurisdiction.
The bench, which included justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, asked solicitor general Tushar Mehta to reconsider filing a detailed reply in 10 days while observing that the court will ponder over the future course of action in the meantime.
“We are not averse to a fact-finding or investigating committee...We will issue notice and then we will take a call on whether a committee is to be appointed -- whether it is to be a committee of
