Read happenings of previous days here: Day 1, Day 2 The morning session was mostly spent in reading pertinent references from the landmark KS Puttaswamy vs Union of India judgment on privacy as a fundamental right. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan began by reading differnet parts of the privacy judgment pertaining to: dangers of profiling through integrating different sets of data concept of informational privacy impossible to visualise in advance all the possible harms that can result from proliferating data sets complex issues surrounding big data and power limitations on privacy - there must be a law, there must be a legitimate State aim, and there restriction must be proportionate privacy is an integral element of the right to life, and that any limitation must be within the constitutional framework "Privacy is the constitutive core of human dignity and the foundation of ordered liberty. It recognises the individual's right to control vital aspects of their life. It is not lost or surrendered merely by being in a public place." Shyam Divan: "The interpretation of privacy must be flexible, to meet evolving challenges." (from the judgment) privacy harms can result both from State and non-State actors. Mr. Divan quoted opinions of different judges from the privacy judgment: Justice Chandrachud's plurality opinion from the privacy judgment From Justice Chelameswar's concurring opinion: the Constitution as securing freedom for every generation of Indians. the interrelationship of Articles 19 (freedom) and 21 (life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. privacy as consisting of "repose, sanctuary and intimate decision."…
