Opposite view

Right to privacy must be preserved

Business Standard 

With reference to the editorial, “by choice” (July 28), there is an imminent need for a clear stand by the government on the issue of citizens’ right to It’s strange that the Attorney General thought it wise to express polar opposite views in two different cases in the on whether right to is a fundamental right. 

He tried to justify his inconsistent stand by arguing that “even if it (right to privacy) is assumed to be a fundamental right, it is multifaceted”. Can he take such a polar opposite stand to “suit” the government, more so when the matter is being considered actively by the  

I endorse the editorial’s observation that the state is “overreaching” its authority by making mandatory for filing tax returns. The top court has already ruled that should not be compulsory for any purpose other than when the government is offering special benefits under its various welfare schemes.

The government shows scant respect for that ruling and has been trying to “universalise” the use of among citizens. Why such a haste? The government should wait for the final outcome of the petition concerning the right to of citizens, which is being heard by a bench of the

Right to must be preserved. For the present though, our hopes are pinned on the

S Kumar   New Delhi 


can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to: 
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg 
New Delhi 110 002 
Fax: (011) 23720201  •  E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All must have a postal address and telephone number