Laksh Educational Society
IPEM Group of Institutions
IPEM Journals

IPEM Journals/Law/Vol. 9

GUARDIANS OF DATA: FROM BRUSSELS TO BHARAT

Anaji Aggarwal · Dr Rahul Varshney

Vol 9, Issue 1 (2025)Pages 69-80Published 2025-12-30

Abstract

In the rapidly evolving digital era, the concept of privacy has undergone a significant transformation. Historically, privacy was perceived primarily as a personal boundary, a sphere of autonomy in which individuals could exercise control over their personal lives without interference from external entities. 1 However, the proliferation of the internet, social media platforms, and smart technologies has fundamentally altered the dynamics of privacy. Today, personal information is continuously collected, monitored, and analyzed by both private corporations and government agencies. The pervasive nature of this digital environment raises pressing questions regarding the protection of individual freedoms and the balance between technological innovation and personal autonomy (Solove, 2021).The right to privacy has long been recognized as a cornerstone of democratic societies. In the Indian context, privacy was historically considered an implicit aspect of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the 2 Constitution of India . This understanding evolved over time, influenced by judicial interpretations and the growing complexities of a digitized society. The landmark judgment of Justice K.S. Pu aswamy v. Union of India (2017) explicitly recognized privacy as a constitutionally protected fundamental right, affirming its centrality to human dignity and autonomy . The 3 judgment marked a watershed moment in Indian jurisprudence, highlighting the need to reconcile individual rights with the demands of state surveillance, national security, and the expanding digital economy. The advent of large-scale data collection, artificial intelligence (AI), and predictive analytics has introduced new challenges to the traditional understanding of privacy. Digital platforms routinely gather vast quantities of personal information for commercial purposes, such as targeted advertising, behavior tracking, and user profiling. Simultaneously, governments utilize digital surveillance for law enforcement, taxation, and national security objectives. These practices raise complex ethical and legal concerns regarding consent, data ownership, and potential misuse of sensitive information (Zuboff, 2019). For instance, the lack of transparency in data processing can erode trust between individuals and digital service providers, compromising the fundamental principles of democracy and human 4 dignity . Digital rights, encompassing the protection of privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information, have thus become increasingly central to discussions on human rights in the twenty-first century. Scholars emphasize that legal compliance alone is insufficient; ethical governance, transparency, and citizen empowerment are equally essential to safeguard digital freedoms (Westin, 1967; Solove, 2008). In the Indian context, this entails not only robust legislative measures, such as the proposed Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, but also public awareness initiatives and digital literacy programs that enable individuals to navigate the complex digital landscape 5 safely and responsibly . This research paper aims to explore the evolving nature of digital rights, focusing on the right to privacy in the information age, particularly in India. It seeks to answer critical questions regarding the legal, ethical, and social dimensions of digital privacy: How has the concept of privacy evolved in response to technological advancements? What challenges arise from government surveillance and corporate data practices? How can legal frameworks be strengthened to ensure the protection of individual freedoms? Through a comprehensive analysis of judicial pronouncements, statutory provisions, and international best practices, this paper intends to provide insights into the ways in which digital privacy can be effectively safeguarded while promoting technological innovation and societal development. The study underscores the necessity of recognizing privacy as a core component of digital rights and advocates for updated legal interpretations and enforcement mechanisms that reflect the realities of the digital age. By situating the Indian experience within a comparative international framework, the research highlights both the opportunities and challenges associated with protecting digital freedoms in a globalized world. Ultimately, the paper argues that the protection of privacy is not merely a legal obligation but a fundamental ethical imperative, central to the preservation of human dignity, autonomy, and trust in the digital era.

Author affiliations

  • Anaji Aggarwal, Research Scholar MVN University Palwal Haryana
  • Dr Rahul Varshney, Dean, Law Depatment, MVN University Palwal Haryana

How to cite

Anaji Aggarwal, Dr Rahul Varshney, “GUARDIANS OF DATA: FROM BRUSSELS TO BHARAT,” IPEM Law Journal, vol. 9, pp. 69–80, Dec. 2025, doi:

References (25)

  1. 1.K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India).
  2. 2.Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1963 SC 1295 (India).
  3. 3.M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, AIR 1954 SC 300 (India).
  4. 4.European Union. (2016). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Regulation (EU) 2016/679. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0679
  5. 5.Information Technology Act, 2000 (India).
  6. 6.Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, Article 12.
  7. 7.International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 17.
  8. 8.European Parliament and Council. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Act. COM/2021/206 final.
  9. 9.Cavoukian, A. (2011). Privacy by design: The 7 foundational principles. Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario.
  10. 10.NITI Aayog. (2018). National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence: #AIforAll.
  11. 11.Cate, F. H., & Mayer-Schönberger, V. (2013). Data protection principles. Oxford University Press.
  12. 12.Solove, D. J. (2007). The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. NYU Press.
  13. 13.Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding privacy. Harvard University Press.
  14. 14.Solove, D. J. (2021). The digital person: Technology and privacy in the information age. NYU Press.
  15. 15.Voigt, P., & Von dem Bussche, A. (2017). The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A practical guide. Springer.
  16. 16.Westin, A. F. (1967). Privacy and freedom. Atheneum.
  17. 17.Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs.
  18. 18.Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big data's disparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3), 671–732. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2477899
  19. 19.Basu, P. (2020). Revisiting India’s data protection framework: A critique of the PDP Bill. Indian Journal of Law and Technology, 16(2), 145–167.
  20. 20.Greenleaf, G. (2018). Global data privacy laws 2017: 120 national data privacy laws, including Indonesia and Turkey. Privacy Laws & Business International Report, (147), 10–13.
  21. 21.Livingstone, S. (2014). Developing social media literacy: How children learn to interpret risky opportunities on social network sites. Communications, 39(3), 283–303.
  22. 22.Lyon, D. (2014). Surveillance, Snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714541861
  23. 23.Marda, V., & Narayan, S. (2020). Data in New Delhi’s predictive policing systems. ACM FAT Conference Proceedings.
  24. 24.Ramanathan, U. (2018). A decade of biometrics in India: Resistance, persistence, and inevitable acceptance. Indian Journal of Law and Technology, 14(1), 1–20.
  25. 25.Internet Freedom Foundation. (2021). Facial recognition in India: A threat to privacy and civil liberties. https://internetfreedom.in
GUARDIANS OF DATA: FROM BRUSSELS TO BHARAT | IPEM Journals