"Digital Age Demands a 'Right to Know the Contactor' for Citizens"
Right to Know the Contactor
proposed digital right requiring any initiating communicator to authenticate their identity before reaching the recipient
Information Asymmetry
structural imbalance where the sender knows their identity but the recipient does not, enabling fraud and deception
The right to privacy in India was constitutionally elevated to a fundamental right under Article 21 by a nine-judge Supreme Court bench in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017). The Court held that any state restriction on privacy must satisfy three cumulative standards: legality (a valid law must authorise the action), legitimate aim (a genuine state interest must be served), and proportionality (the least intrusive means must be employed). This tripartite test now governs all privacy-adjacent legislation and executive action in India.
India's statutory data protection framework is anchored in the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA). The Act recognises individuals as 'data principals' with rights over their personal data, and imposes obligations on 'data fiduciaries' — entities that process such data. However, Section 17 of the DPDPA contains broad law-enforcement exemptions that effectively exclude police and intelligence operations from the Act's core obligations. The Data Protection Board, the adjudicatory body envisaged under the Act, has not yet been constituted, leaving enforcement gaps.
Beyond state surveillance, the digital economy has created a parallel problem: private actors — scammers, telemarketers, political operatives, and foreign intelligence agents — routinely initiate contact with citizens while concealing or falsifying their identities. Existing frameworks such as the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations (TCCCPR) and the Information Technology Act, 2000 address some dimensions of unsolicited and fraudulent communication, but no unified legal right compels a contactor to authenticate their identity before initiating communication.
The concept of a 'right to know the contactor' rests on a foundational ethical asymmetry: the person initiating contact knows exactly who they are, while the recipient knows almost nothing. This information imbalance is not merely inconvenient — it is structurally exploited by cybercriminals, phishing networks, and disinformation actors. The argument is that once an entity voluntarily initiates communication — whether by phone, email, social media, or digital advertisement — the ethical and legal burden shifts: the recipient acquires a right to reliable information about the sender's authentic identity.
This proposed right is distinct from, and complementary to, the existing right to privacy. Privacy protects individuals from unwanted disclosure of their own information. The right to know the contactor, by contrast, places an affirmative obligation on the initiating party to disclose their identity. The two rights operate in different directions: privacy is defensive, while the right to know the contactor is assertive. …
Under which Article of the Constitution of India is the 'Right to Privacy' protected?
Under which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India, has the Supreme Court of India placed the Right to Privacy?
Consider the following pairs:
Provision — Subject Matter
1.IT Act 2000, Section 66C — Cheating by impersonation using computer resources
2.IT Act 2000, Section 66D — Identity theft using computer resources
3.DPDPA 2023, Section 17 — Law-enforcement exemptions from data protection obligations
How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?
The Supreme Court's three-part test in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) for evaluating restrictions on the right to privacy requires which of the following?
1.The restriction must be authorised by a valid law (legality).
2.The restriction must serve a genuine state interest (legitimate aim).
3.The restriction must employ the least intrusive means available (proportionality).
4.The restriction must receive prior judicial approval in all cases.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Assertion (A): Anonymous digital communication by the initiating party creates an information asymmetry that structurally enables cybercrime and disinformation.
Reason (R): The right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution grants every individual an absolute right to remain anonymous in all digital communications.
Which of the following is correct?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account