Citizens' Issues
HC allows new privacy policy of WhatsApp with rider
The Delhi High Court on Friday allowed WhatsApp to roll out its new privacy policy but said it cannot share data of its users collected up to September 25, 2016.
 
A division bench of Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said WhatsApp will not share users' data collected under its old privacy policy over the years up to September 25, 2016, with Facebook or any other related company. 
 
WhatsApp has to completely delete all data of users who chooses to opt out of the instant messaging app after the coming into force of its new privacy policy, said the court.
 
The court also said that WhatsApp will delete users' data up to September 25, even of those who choose not to opt out of the instant messaging app and agree with new privacy policy. 
 
"We have taken note of the fact that under the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the users are given an option to delete their WhatsApp account at any time, in which event, the information of the users would be deleted from the the servers of WhatsApp. We are, therefore, of the view that it is always open to the existing users of WhatsApp, who do not want their information to be shared with Facebook, to opt for deletion of their account," the court held.
 
The court also directed the government to consider the issue of functioning of instant messaging apps such as WhatsApp and take an appropriate decision as to whether it is feasible to bring them under the statutory regulatory framework. 
 
On August 25, WhatsApp made extensive changes to its privacy policy. Under the new norm, it announced it would and could share users' personal information, including their phone numbers, with its parent company Facebook.
 
WhatsApp had given its users a 30-day period to opt out of the new privacy policy which expires on September 25.
 
The new privacy policy is in stark contrast to the earlier one that existed from July 7, 2012. 
 
The court's order came on a PIL which said privacy of the users was threatened by the new policy announced by Facebook, which now owns the mobile messaging service.
 
WhatsApp has maintained that it does not retain information of its users on its servers once the account has been deleted by the user. 
 
Petitioners' advocate Pratibha M. Singh had opposed WhatsApp's submission saying that user information continues to be retained for a longer period of time even after it is deleted.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
 
 

 

User

GST exemption limit fixed by Council, decision on rates later
In its first set of decisions, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council on Friday fixed the turnover-based exemption limit from such levies at Rs 20 lakh, but left the decision on fixing the actual tax rates and the finalisation of draft rules for later.
 
Briefing the media after the two-day, maiden meeting of the apex decision-making body on the new indirect tax regime, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said the council also decided that exemption for assessees in the northeastern region and hill states will be Rs 10 lakh.
 
The base year for compensation to states -- on the basis of which they will get a share of the GST revenue -- has been fixed as 2015-16, said the Council Chairman. "We have also decided that the compensation should be given at regular intervals to states."
 
The Finance Minister, who is also Chairman of the Council, said the jurisdiction over assessees with a turnover of Rs 1.5 crore and below will solely be with the states and for those above, it will be jointly with the central and state governments.
 
The council is scheduled to reconvene on September 30 and again from October 17-19.
 
"All existing cesses will be subsumed in GST," Jaitley said, even as officials added that the draft rules and the model laws could be taken up on September 30. 
 
"We will try to finalise the rates and the slabs during our meeting on October 17, 18 and 19," said the Finance Minister on a matter that has widely divergent views among the states and the Centre.
 
Chief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian recommended a standard rate of 17-19 per cent in a recent report, even as some states have demanded a rates as high as 26-27 per cent.
 
On Thursday, it was evident that the task ahead towards consensus was not easy.
 
"Today, starting from September 22, we have roughly two months time till November 22 to resolve all the outstanding issues. Therefore, a draft timetable has been given, which also have been adopted," Jaitley had said after the first day of the council meeting.
 
On the issue of appointing a co-chair, the Finance Minister said: "Will elect the Vice Chairman at a subsequent date. The appointment for Vice Chairman can be done unanimously or by voting."
 
The central government is trying to resolve all outstanding issues over the uniform pan-India indirect tax regime at the earliest in a bid to meet deadline for its implementation from April 1, 2017.
 
Jaitley had also said the target roll-out of GST will depend on the passage of the Central GST and the Integrated GST (IGST) bills in Parliament and adoption of respective State GST bills by each state.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
 
 

 

User

CIC calls father for hearing eight months after comatose son dies
28 September 2016: CIC calls for hearing after two years; 
 
6 January 2016: Appellant’s son has already died 
 
On 1 February 2013, Parag Ingle, an 8th standard student from the prestigious Loyola High School of Pune, was hit on the forehead with a bullet that came from the rifle of a junior officer of National Cadet Corps (NCC) who was training him and his classmates on NCC grounds. His family was crushed with grief. Parag, who was a wizard at elocution and drama competitions in school, sunk into a coma at the Command Hospital. And that lasted for two years – from 1 February 2013 until he breathed his last on 6 January 2016.
 
His father, Devendra Ingle, an engineer at the Pune Municipal Corp, knocked at the NCC Headquarters wanting to know was how his son died and what were the circumstances that led to his death as well as what action was been taken against Amod Ghanekar, the junior officer, who shot Parag? He did not get any answers nor was any action taken against Ghanekar, who instead went to court, claiming his innocence.
 
The Pune Police report categorically nailed Ghanekar. The report states “Without having any revolver license or having any authority to conduct firing, Amod Ghanekar stood behind the boys, handled the .22 rifle in an irresponsible manner, loaded and despite the knowledge that it would be grievous or fatal if a student suddenly gets up, he fired. A bullet hit Parag on his forehead and he was grievously injured. Thus, it is an attempt to kill, by Ghanekar.”
 
Ingle, came with the Central Information Commission (CIC) notice to this author. He said, “See, I kept waiting for justice by CIC since the time I filed my second appeal on 7 October 2014. Since my son was battling for life, I filed RTI application with the Additional Directorate General of Army Education, New Delhi, in mid-September 2014, seeking information on the following. On 1 February 2013, at NCC Headquarters, Pune, my son NCC Cadet Master Parag Devendra Ingle was gravely injured when he was shot with five bullets by a .22 Rifle. He is still unconscious. I would like to get all the information and papers regarding the action taken by the Army on all the Army Officers and In-charge person connected to this incident. I would also like to know the nature of punishment was given to the person responsible for this incident.”
 
Since he got no information, he filed second appeal way back in September 2014 with CIC and now he says, “I have got notice for hearing on 28 September 2016, which I have to attend, via video conferencing, when I have already lost my precious son.’’
 
In what can be called as complete apathy by the CIC, his second appeal was simply filed away. Could the CIC not have shown some sensitivity towards such a shocking case, that even a stranger would feel the pangs of pain? Should the CIC not have considered an out-of-turn hearing? Should all second appeals be treated in a nonchalant manner?
 
The CIC notice dated 12 September 2016 has asked Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), in the Ministry of Defence, NCC Group Headquarters, Pune and CPIO of Head Quarter, DG NCC, West Block IV, RK Puram to be present, besides Devendra Ingle, who as complainant would be present through video conference. Despite the delay and post his son’s death, Ingle says “…does not matter if my son had died. I still want to know what were the sequence of events that led to his death. What action has been taken against other NCC officers, besides Ghanekar who has merely been suspended.”
 
 
RTI activist Vijay Kumbhar who co-petitioned the second appeal states, “This is a classic case of the CIC being totally cold and clinical towards some second appeals which may call for great urgency in disposal. It is sad that there was no one to apply balm on Ingle’s grief, not even the RTI Act, which has been enacted to empower a common man.”
 
You may also want to read…
 
 
(Vinita Deshmukh is consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book “To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte” with Vinita Kamte and is the author of “The Mighty Fall”.)

User

COMMENTS

Surendera Bhanot

2 months ago

I do no how it happened!! It was bad. But the Appellant in this case seems to have not used the "Life and Liberty" provision wherein the CIC has to hear the case within 48-hours of its filing. As per Proviso to Section 7(1), Public Information Officer is required to where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the request.

the effect of this percolate down to the appeals under section 19(1) as well 19(3). I have used this in In the CIC more than once and got the notices issued to respondents over telephone!!

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)