5 essential intellectual property considerations for a new EU start-up

By

-

October 7, 2021

This is written by Swayamsiddha Das, pursuing a Diploma in Intellectual Property, Media, and Entertainment laws from lawsikho. This article has been edited by Aatima Bhatia (associate, lawsikho) and by Dipshi Swara (senior associate, lawsikho).

Table of Contents

Introduction

The word “I” in business stands for “Innovation” and “Ideas”, we humans have been blessed with that in abundance. When we think of using those ideas for doing something innovative, creative and showcase some originality in our work the role of IP Rights becomes very relevant.

Start-ups are companies that run on innovative and unique ideas that aim to provide quality service at a cheaper and faster pace to the customers. In the case of start-ups that are set up in the European Union (EU), the only way they can establish and attain a trans-border reputation is by developing high-value goods and services, as well as powerful brands and innovations. Many EU start-ups, therefore, tend to work in an environment of intense intellectual property. Therefore, it is very important to understand if start-up ideas can be protected or not? What is the role of IP in start-ups? What are the essential IP rights associated while establishing a start-up in the European Union (EU)?

Can start-up ideas be protected?

Yes, one can protect their Start-up ideas. When you discuss your start-up concept/strategy with others before your product or service is ready for market, you can safeguard it by treating it as private (a trade secret) or by employing a non-disclosure agreement. Before you transform your concept into a product or service, you should ensure that only you have exclusive rights over the entire start-up. To protect the implementation of your concept and sections of your website, many forms of intellectual property (IP) rights are available, such as patents, trademarks, design rights, and copyright. Intellectual property assets are not to be underestimated. If you do not take measures on time, you may lose your rights or be held accountable for wrongdoing.

Essential IP rights that are associated with start-ups

Trademarks

Trademark plays a very important role in any business as it allows the consumer to identify and differentiate your products and services provided by you in the vast market. New start-up companies who are planning to get their brand name registered in the European Union (EU) should choose a name that is distinctive and not descriptive in Nature. Ex: If your start-up is all about selling hot chocolate in the European Union (EU) and you want a trademark for registration you simply can’t register “Hot Cocoa in Winters” as a trademark as it is very descriptive to what you are selling and not distinctive.

But then only having a good name for your start-up is not enough. The company registrations may offer limited protection to your brand but they have considered weak protection of trademarks is a very affordable method of protection against intellectual property, but failure to do so may cause names to be altered later. Hence it is very necessary to register your brand in those nations where you want to conduct business, trademarks should be safeguarded.

Apart from these there are few things that one needs to keep in mind while applying for trademark protection in the European Union (EU) and they are as follows:

The apparent advantage of an EU mark is that 28 nations and a market of half a thousand billion customers may be covered by one registration. It is because there are no impediments to registration in any one of the nations to obtain a European Union (EU) trademark. A barrier to registrations can block EU registrations in a single small European Union (EU) nation, So the European Union (EU) trademark covers everything or nothing, and only some Member States cannot accept it in part.
If you are a Start-up who is just venturing into the market with very little funding and is worried about the cost for trademark registration in the European Union (EU) then you don’t have to worry about it as the government fee for Trademark Registration varies from 850 to 1000 Euros which is very pocket friendly as your Start-up name would enjoy protection for 10 years in 28 countries. If you are unable to go to the EUIPO (European Union Intellectual Property Office) for trademark registration, you can apply for registration online.
Another advantage of getting your trademark registered in the European Union is that they are incredibly fast. The European Union (EU) Trademark Office offers a “fast track” method that allows for very rapid scrutiny of the application, generally within less than a week. There are a few easy tasks to follow quickly but the best part is that there are no additional costs. The only thing is that not everyone can get a fast-track application, only the applicants who have to choose the goods and service from the EUIPO’s database of goods and services.

Patent

Patents are mainly a kind of intellectual property that forbids the replication, sale, use or import of a certain invention or revolutionary procedure by other people.

Patent filing should be considered as part of its product strategy by start-ups, especially in the first stage in which a product will be marketed. Patents offer a range of long-term advantages that justify expenses and time. The most convenient part of the process is to register a patent beforehand since the product is legally protected and the patent proprietor also has the right to prohibit others from duplicating the idea and design of the product.

No firm may then claim the innovation of its proprietor, and nobody can produce and sell it without the agreement of the proprietor. If, without due authorization of the owner, an entity imports or exports a patented invention, the latter shall take action against such violation. Until the patent period is ended, the patent proprietors have the only right to exploit the innovation as per their business plans.

The main plus of a patent is that it may be licensed or sold by the patent proprietor to others. It also helps to recoup the money spent on R&D and patent filing. It becomes a substantial source of revenue. In conjunction with a registered design and trademark, companies were founded only to collect the rights to a patent they licensed. Above all, a patent increases the value and potential of a product that promotes and helps attract investors’ trust. Risk capitalists are interested in working with or investing in start-ups that already hold a patent.

Many start-up ventures tend to ignore this IP right but they need to understand that the market is highly competitive, which might pose a major difficulty. Without a patent, successful goods are an easy victim to competitors who can exploit an innovation without getting a license to use or to sell it. Without a patent on its product, major businesses can exploit a small player by producing a comparable product and selling it at a better price. This is a dangerous technique that can destroy your product’s market worth or share. Even tiny companies can sell this product at a far cheaper price, as they are not pressured to repay the funds invested in R&D by the creator. Without a patent, litigation against infringers will be impossible since there is no specific evidence to support the claim that your innovation is a particular product.

Copyright

Copyright protects the expression of ideas and not the ideas per se. They mainly grant protection to literary, artistic, musical works, etc. The main yardstick to determine if your ideas are eligible for copyright protection is “Originality”. The registration of copyright provides you with the protection of over 70 years. This exhibits that your IP is legally protected and authorises you to sue whoever copies your work.

Emerging start-up firms that trade or provide services via web channels must invest a significant amount of money in building a website that presents their products/services originally and creatively. Similarly, start-ups developing unique computer software and programs cannot allow any rival to utilise their original input or programming for their firm.

Start-ups, therefore, need to assess if their work can be infringed and how long work needs to be protected. Once these questions are assessed, the start-up can decide whether or not it requires copyright. Your registration will for a considerable duration prevent the threat of commercial abuse of your work.

If you are trying to set up your Start-up in the European Union (EU) then you have to comply with Article-17 of the EU Copyright Directive if you are providing a platform to users for content sharing. This compliance can be done by ensuring the following things:

Considering how the laws the going to be applied in your business
Set up a forum specifically for Takedown notices in your platform
Ensure that the terms and conditions in your website include clauses about copyright violation and exempted content.
Think about the ways where you can obtain authorisation from the author to display content and prevent any kind of unauthorised sharing in your platform.

Design

Designs are regarded as one of the most important components of a business. Design rights are a type of intellectual property protection that protects distinctive designs against imitation and infringement. Design rights have become more essential for designers and businesses all around the world in this regard. The key elements for design protection in Europe are “novelty” and “individual character,” as established in Articles 5 and 6 of the CDR, as well as in the Designs directive’s parallel provisions. The proprietor of a Community design has the sole right to prevent any third party from utilizing an infringing design anywhere in the European Union. A single application provides five years of protection, which may be renewed for an additional five years up to a maximum of 25 years. Unregistered Community designs are protected for three years from the date of public exposure inside the European Union. Community design protection is a popular means of getting protection in Europe since it is simple to obtain, relatively affordable, gives unitary protection across Europe, and may be enforced in specially established Community design courts.

A start-up emerges from an inventive and creative effort, with design being one of the most important components. To stay ahead of the competition, a start-up must be innovative. In this case, it is absolutely important to safeguard such inventions through possible intellectual property rights. The field of preliminary design protection assists start-ups in restricting large multinational corporations from exploiting innovative designs to gain a competitive edge in the market. Owning design rights to a good design enables start-ups to increase their value and revenues, perhaps leading to successful franchising. In essence, it is strongly advised that earlier protection of design rights would increase a company’s economic worth and reliability in the market, as well as aid in the establishment of a solid platform, particularly for start-ups.

Trade secrets

The purpose of a trade secret is to gain a competitive advantage. It is the knowledge that is not widely known to the general public, has economic worth, and is kept secret via reasonable measures. Formulas, patterns, compilations, programs, gadgets, procedures, techniques, processes, and the like are all examples of trade secrets. Whether you’re employing a full-time employee for your business or collaborating with a third-party supplier for a specific service, make sure you do your research. Perform background checks on recruits, clarify any restrictions, and underline the significance of signing trade secret protection agreements. You want to avoid inadvertent exposure just as much as you want to avoid intentional theft. During the actual onboarding process, educate workers on the repercussions of exposing trade secrets and document every conversation and educational training program you perform.

Conclusion

Intellectual property plays a very important role for startups. The major mistake that start-ups make is not protecting their IP rights. Before venturing into the highly competitive market one must try to secure his entire idea by owing complete ownership over them. Start-ups must safeguard their technology and build the groundwork for future success to prevent problems with intellectual property resources. In the long term, IP rights improve start-up integrity and create additional possibilities to innovate and redefine.

References

Students of LawSikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Analyzing the power of the Election Commission to de-register a political party

By

Diva Rai

-

October 7, 2021

0

360009-election-commission-of-india — Image source - https://bit.ly/3DhL4Eu

This article is written by Akshita Gupta, pursuing BBA LLB from Symbiosis Law School Noida. This article discusses why the election commission does not possess the power to de-register a political party.

Table of Contents

Introduction

In India, the Election Commission currently only has the power to register parties, not to de-register them. Furthermore, the Representation of the People Act, 1951 makes no express provision for a political party’s de-registration. There have been different instances where the Election Commission has made recommendations to the Government to make laws for the power to deregister a political party. Also, the Madras High Court has asked the Central Government to make laws as soon as possible on the same. The need to grant the Election Commission of India the power to deregister a political party is to make sure the political parties do not violate the Indian Constitution. It is not mandatory for a political party to register itself with the Election Commission of India, but to use the provisions of Part IV-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 related to the registration of political parties, they must register themselves. This article tends to discuss the reasons why the power of deregistration has not been granted to ECI till now.

Parliament’s decision to not allow political parties to be de-registered

Time and again, the concern emerges as to why the Parliament decided to leave out procedures for de-registration of political parties when it made registration rules. According to the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Indian National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare and Others (2002), the Parliament might have purposefully omitted to give the Election Commission of India the power to de-register a political party, possibly because the Election Commission of India operates independently and ensures free and fair elections under the Indian Constitution.

Historical background

It was from 1998 that ECI made recommendations to the Government to modify the legislation and give it the right to deregister political parties, and in 2004, it sent proposals for electoral reforms to the Centre. The law, however, was never amended to include the power of ECI to de-register a political party. The Election Commission came closest to changing the law in 1994 when the Representation of the People (Second Amendment) Bill was introduced in Parliament. However, since this bill was not passed, it could not become an act.

The Representation of the People (Second Amendment) Bill suggested introducing Section 29-B, which allows a complaint to be filed with the High Court within whose jurisdiction a political party’s main office was based, for the cancellation of the party’s registration because it bears a religious name, or that its memorandum or rules and regulations do not comply with the Section 29-A(5), or that its activities are not in compliance with their memorandum or rules and regulations. However, when the Lok Sabha was dissolved in 1996, this bill lapsed.

In 2016, the then Chief Election Commissioner, Dr Nasim Zaidi, proposed 47 Electoral Reforms, including decriminalizing politics, preventing money laundering, increasing transparency in political party funding, making bribery a criminal offence, criminalizing paid news, and empowering the ECI to countermand elections in cases of bribery and misuse, on the lines of countermanding in event of booth capturing. He stated that a task force in the Law Ministry is reviewing the ECI and Law Commission recommendations and that the outcome is keenly awaited. He also proposed the de-registration of political parties as one of his reforms.

In the year 2017, Madras High Court asked the Central Government to make a decision as early as possible for the recommendation made by the ECI in the year 1998, about providing the ECI with the power to deregister any political party that violates the Indian Constitution.

When the bench disposed of the public interest litigation (PIL), they made an observation that ECI should have powers to initiate appropriate actions against the registered parties if their leaders make defamatory speeches against any caste, sex, or race.

Relevant case laws

Indian National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002)

Facts

It was argued in the case, filed before the Kerala High Court that, despite the Supreme Court’s declaration that calling a bundh is unlawful, that political parties in Kerala continued to call bundhs under the guise of hartal, according to the writ petitions filed before the Kerala High Court. It was requested that a directive be given to the Kerala government to take adequate measures to give effect to the Supreme Court’s declaration of law in the matter of the Communist Party of India. The High Court issued orders from time to time, and the Chief Secretary and Director General of Police issued relevant orders in response, but such orders were ineffective, and political parties continued to call for bundhs in the name of hartals. It was also claimed that some of the writ petitioners sent representations to the Election Commission of India, requesting that the registered political parties be de-registered since they had violated the Constitution’s provisions. However, the Election Commission took no action in this regard.

Issue

The issue addressed, in this case, was whether the Election Commission of India, under Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, has the authority to de-register or cancel a political party’s registration because it has called for a hartal through force, intimidation, or coercion, thereby violating the provisions of the Indian Constitution.

Judgment

The Court held that there is no express provision in the law that allows the Election Commission to deregister a political party for violating the Indian Constitution, except in rare circumstances that are as follows:

Firstly, when a political party becomes registered by defrauding the Commission. Fraud voids any act or order issued by any quasi-judicial authority, even if it lacks the capacity for review. The impact of fraud would typically be to nullify all acts and orders, according to Smith vs East Ellis Rural District Council (1956). In Indian Bank vs Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt Ltd (1996), it was held that the power to cancel or recall an order acquired by forgery or fraud extends not only to courts of law but even to statutory tribunals that lack review authority. Thus, if the ECI discovers fraud or forgery by a political party while seeking registration, the Commission has the authority to de-register such political party.
Secondly, when a political party modifies its terminology of association, rules, and regulations, abrogating the provisions therein under Section 29A(5), or notifies the Commission that it has lost faith and allegiance to the Indian Constitution or the principles of socialism, secularism, and democracy, or that it will not uphold the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of the country. The exact substratum on which the party earned registration is knocked off in this situation, and the Commission, in its supplementary power, can annul the registration of a political party.
Lastly, when the Central Government declares a registered political party illegal under the terms of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, or a comparable law. In such cases, the Commission’s power to cancel a political party’s registration is justified by the well-established legal principle that when a statutory authority is given power, all incidental and ancillary powers necessary to carry out that power are included in the power, even if they are not expressly granted.

Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (2014)

In the year 2014, in this case, the Supreme Court of India requested the Law Commission of India to examine whether the ECI should be granted the power to deregister a political party. Let us discuss the case in detail.

Facts

a writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution before the Supreme Court of India to curb the threat which was being caused by the hate speeches made by the leaders of the political parties, based on the religions, races, castes, sexes and birthplaces of individuals. The relevance of this case was to issue guidelines related to curbing hate speech by the political party.

Arguments

Petitioner

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the law in place is insufficient to cope with the threat of hate speech. The petitioner’s request for redress is consistent with the Constitution’s provisions. Religious leaders, political leaders, and elected representatives violated Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution by making hate speeches based on caste, religion, or ethnicity, which were also in violation of fundamental duties mentioned under Article 51A. The Court should not keep silent in the face of such circumstances, it was contended. It should use Article 142 because the current legal framework is insufficient to combat the threat of hate speech.

Respondent

It was submitted by the counsel of the respondent that there are various provisions under which the aggrieved party could seek remedy for the issues involved. In this case, the issue was the law’s implementation and enforcement. It was said that the current court had framed several recommendations and that the matter had been forwarded to the Law Commission of India for analysis of relevant legislation. It was recommended that because there is a gap in the law, the Court should not operate as a legislature, but rather submit recommendations to the Law Commission.

Judgment

There are various statutes and provisions related to curbing the menace of hate speech, specifically the Indian Penal Code (1860). The main issue is the lack of effective execution. Every citizen has to follow the statutes to make them effective. Further, the Court was of the opinion that they should not issue the guidelines which are not capable of execution, since the Court must not pass any orders that are judicially unmanageable. The Supreme Court of India held that the copy of the judgment has been provided to the Law Commission of India for further study and thereby the writ petition was disposed of.

Conclusion

The recommendations of the Law Commission are still pending before the Parliament, which means the ECI does not possess the power to deregister a political party under normal circumstances. This has led to the lack of control over the political parties that are involved in money-making and deriving benefits from taxes paid by the common people. The legislation on this grey area is the need of the hour for a country like India.

References

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Hostile takeover deal analysis : Kraft Foods Inc and Cadbury Plc

By

Shoronya Banerjee

-

October 7, 2021

0

This is written by Sourabh Kumar singh, pursuing a Diploma in M&A, Institutional Finance, and Investment Laws (PE and VC transactions) from LawSikho.com. This article has been edited by Amitabh Ranjan (Associate, Lawsikho) and by Dipshi Swara (Senior Associate, Lawsikho).

Table of Contents

Introduction

2010 saw the most controversial takeover of British Cadbury by the American giant Kraft Foods. Kraft hopes to acquire Cadbury to expand its global influence, especially in the snack category from emerging markets such as India. However, Cadbury did not sell, posing a major challenge to Kraft’s search for Cadbury. Thus, Kraft initiated a hostile takeover of Cadbury in 2009, sparking extensive public discussions about the UK’s takeover code, leading the UK to modify takeover rules on how foreign companies acquire British companies. Many people in the M&A field believe that it has become too easy for foreign companies to acquire British competitors, and the process has become a bit sketchy. The acquisition and merger team responsible for overseeing this area reviewed the law and revised the Takeover Code in September 2011. This article focuses on the Kraft-Cadbury acquisition and highlights the changes made in 2011 after the acquisition.

Hostile takeovers

In friendly takeovers, the board of directors and management of a company agrees on the entity/company that is going to be acquired by another company. The target board negotiates the purchase conditions with potential buyers, reaches an agreement on the price, and finally submits the offer to shareholders for voting. In contrast, in a hostile takeover, the acquisition of a company occurs without the consent of the target company’s board of directors and management. The purchaser, also known as the predator, directly contacts the shareholders and offers to purchase enough shares to take over the target company or change the management so that the takeover can be approved.

Kraft

Kraft Foods is an American company founded in 1923. Before the acquisition of Cadbury, Kraft was the world’s second-largest food company with operations in more than 150 countries. A large part of Kraft’s global revenue comes from only 11 well-known brands, and each brand generates annual revenue of more than US$ and US$1 billion. Most of the revenue comes from developed markets in North America (U.S. and Canada) and Europe. At the time (before the acquisition), Kraft had little influence in the world’s most powerful emerging markets (except China), such as India, Mexico, Brazil, and South Africa. Entering these emerging markets and advancing into the high-growth snack market are key elements of their long-term strategy.

Cadbury

Cadbury, a British company with a history of nearly 200 years, started from the chocolate factory in the UK in 1824 and expanded its business through organic growth and acquisitions became the world’s second-largest confectionery company with a global market share that exceeded 10%. Its product portfolio includes well-known chocolate, candy, and chewing gum brands such as Cadbury Dairy Milk, Halls, and Trident.

Its Halls confectionery brand is the world’s largest confectionery brand, accounting for more than one-third of Cadbury’s confectionery revenue. Since Cadbury focuses on doing one thing well (chocolate and candy), this allows them to effectively penetrate the emerging market.

Why the bid for cadbury?

It appears that entry into emerging markets is the key driver for Kraft Foods’ interest in Cadbury. Kraft Foods has become a global leader in concentrated powdered soft drinks with ‘Tang’. However, it cannot penetrate certain emerging markets, such as India, where Cadbury’s brands are already mature and five factories produce sweets. The use of the Cadbury name allows Kraft Foods to conquer new markets, strengthens other markets already established by Kraft Foods, and, at the same time, allows it to grow its own brand and market share by maximizing profits.

The prediction made by Kraft Foods, in which the benefits of the acquisition of Cadbury when it enters Mexico, Turkey, South Africa, and India can be observed. For Cadbury, markets such as Brazil and China have been having difficulty gaining market share and visibility; Cadbury will also benefit from this acquisition by increasing its market shares in these markets.

Cadbury products are sold by the largest retail chain in India, enabling them to reach 92% of the population of India. The acquisition of Cadbury means that Kraft products can enter India and other rapidly developing countries directly.

The acquisition timeline

August 28, 2009- Irene Rosenfeld, CEO of Kraft, approaches Cadbury chairman Roger Carr for a possible merger. Cadbury’s board unequivocally rejected the offer.

September 7, 2009 – Kraft makes public its informal offer for Cadbury. Kraft’s stock prices drop since the initial talks in August valuing the offer price at 745p. Cadbury’s share rose to £7.83 on the announcement, surpassing the offering price from Kraft.

November 1 – 15, 2009- Kraft reiterates its original offer of 300p in cash and 0.2589 new Kraft share.

November 15 – 30, 2009- Cadbury’s chairman indicates that Hershey might be preferred by the Cadbury board as a bidder because its values are similar.

December 2009- Kraft’s offer is now worth 713p a share as its stock price continues to fall. With no intruder, Kraft doesn’t feel compelled to revise its offer.

January 1 – 10, 2010- Kraft sells its frozen pizza business to Nestle for $3.7 billion. Nestle confirmed it will not bid for Cadbury.

January 11 – 18, 2010- Cadbury again rejects Kraft’s offer as it announces that sales rose 5.0% in 2009. Kraft’s CEO visits the UK for a series of investor meetings. Many decline meetings indicating that the offer should be above 800p per share. No change in the offer price.

January 19, 2010- Kraft submits a revised offer that was eventually supported by the Cadbury board. Cadbury announces a special 10p dividend.

Kraft Cadbury post deal impact

February 10, 2010: Kraft closes Cadbury plan: Kraft is accused of violating its apparent commitment to open a Cadbury plant in Summerdale, near Bristol. The factory has over 4000 employees and is scheduled to close by Cadbury in 2011.

March 5, 2010: Kraft deal hits Cadbury employees with a triple blow

Cadbury employees suffered a triple blow after news that Kraft Foods was preparing to close the final salary pension plan from the British pastry chef. To open up to new members, increase employee contributions and eliminate up to 150 jobs.

March 16, 2010: Call for the adoption of the “Cadbury Act” as Kraft’s stage for MPs to have a barbecue. The union representing the 6,000 British Cadbury workers asked parliamentarians for better protection for the employees of the newly acquired companies.

March 17, 2010: Kraft apologises: After being accused by members of parliament of fighting for the control of Cadbury, Kraft made a humiliating public apology and vowed not to lay off any manufacturing jobs in the UK for at least two years. The promise only covered 40% of the UK employees in the expanded company, which made Americans feel that Shock.

August 5, 2011: Kraft will split into two companies Kraft planned to split the food giant only 18 months after the controversial acquisition of British chocolate maker Cadbury. This division will provide investors with the opportunity to bet on the fast-growing snack business in emerging markets, or choose to receive stable dividends from the slower-growing general grocery business.

September 19, 2011: UK Tightens Its Hostile Bidding Rules -The British takeover Commission has strengthened its hostile bidding rules to correct what it calls the “tactical advantage” of bidders. The commission said the hostile practices would have a destabilizing effect on the acquired company, adding that the results of the tender were “inappropriately affected.”

Amendments after the cadbury acquisition

In the light of unfavourable public comments after Kraft’s acquisition of Cadbury, the British takeover Group with encouragement from the British government, conducted a negotiation period in the United Kingdom on the possibility of some key changes in acquisition.

Therefore, it is recommended that the code be revised as follows:

Requires a method of naming potential bidders in the advertisement at the beginning of the bidding period, regardless of who publishes the advertisement;
And requires any public name unless approved by the expert group. The potential bidder must be within a fixed period of four weeks from the date of the potential publicly appointed bidder.
Declares the final intention to make the offer (of in accordance with Rule 2.5);
Or declares that it will not bid, so it will be subject to the rules The restriction mentioned in rule 2.8 (that is, it will not be able to bid within six months);
The target company jointly requests an extension of the term and explains the expected schedule for the announcement with intention to determine the offer under Rule 2.5, and then an announcement is generally required to update the status of the discussions in the market and the revised deadline.

How was the Kraft : Cadbury deal restructured?

After completion of the acquisition, the Kraft Group reorganized and formed Mondelez International and Kraft Corporation. The business categories are Mondelez International and Kraft. Mondelez is entrusted to the snacks business and Cadbury becomes its subsidiary. The company runs the grocery business of the former Kraft Foods Group. Additionally, Kraft and Heinz merged to form Kraft Heinz in 2015, and Heinz owns 51% of the company’s shares. In today’s time, it is the third largest food and beverage company in North America and the fifth largest in the world. On the other hand, the American chocolate company Hershey owns the rights to the Cadbury brand in the United States, which was acquired from Cadbury Schweppes in 1988. In 2016, Mondelez initiated a takeover bid for Hershey, but it was rejected by Hershey’s board of directors.

Conclusion

Cadbury’s attractive financial situation during the recession made it a lucrative M&A option in the confectionery industry in 2009. After two bids were rejected, Kraft made a hostile offer to acquire Cadbury. The acquisition made headlines in the industry and raised serious questions about the British takeover law. After this controversial acquisition, the takeover panel was forced to update and revise their takeover Code.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

A complete guide on controller-processor contracts

By

Oishika Banerji

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article has been written by Arun Nair pursuing the Diploma in Advanced Contract Drafting, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution from LawSikho. This article has been edited by Dipshi Swara (Senior Associate, Lawsikho).

Table of Contents

Introduction

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), is the yardstick law of the European Union for the protection of privacy of an individual, which came into force on 25 May 2018. The regulation introduced a higher duty for the data controllers and data processors. One of the main duties of controllers and processors is to enter into a legally binding contract governing the processing of personal data when a processor is engaged by the controller and instructed to process personal data. The contract is important so that both parties understand their responsibilities and liabilities. This article outlines in brief, the obligations of the data controllers and data processors, to enter into a contract under the GDPR, and the provisions which should be included in such a controller-processor contract.

Processing under GDPR

Under the GDPR, both the controllers and processors are subject to several enhanced obligations. Processors, for example, must only process personal data upon the receipt of written instructions from the controller. A data controller on the other hand has the responsibility to define the purpose and means of the processing of personal data.

Article 4(2) defines processing as – “any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storing, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction.”

Thus, the data controllers and data processors shall enter into a legally binding contract whenever a controller engages a processor for processing personal data on its behalf. Further, the GDPR stipulates that controllers should engage only such processors which provide sufficient guarantees to implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to comply with GDPR and to protect the rights of data subjects.

Both these parties should bear in mind that there are multiple other conditions that the GDPR imposes directly on them such as – record keeping, ensuring security of processing etc. These direct responsibilities will apply to the data controllers and data processors in addition to any contractual obligation which they may be subject to under the data processing contract. Similarly, in case the parties are found in breach of the GDPR, they may be liable to fines and other penalties in addition to being in breach of the contract to which they are a party.

Who are data controllers & data processors?

Data controllers

As per Article 4(7) of GDPR, controllers are “any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes, and means of the processing of personal data.” The data controller has to implement appropriate measures, depending upon the risk and severity posed by the processing, to ensure and demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with the regulation.

Data processor

Article 4(8) of GDPR defines a processor as “any natural person or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which processes personal data on behalf of the controller.”

Further, Art.(28)(1) states that, if a ‘data controller’ engages a ‘data processor’ for processing personal data, the controller shall ensure that the processor enact necessary technical and organizational measures in a manner that it meets the requirements of the legislation and safeguards the rights of data subjects.
No processor can engage the services of another processor without the specific written approval of the data controller and such processor shall state to the controller, all intended changes that may occur with the inclusion or substitution of other processors.
Data Processing agreements are binding on the data processors and set out the subject matter, duration, purpose and nature, type of data and rights and obligations of the data controllers under the contract.
The contract or other legal act further stipulates in particular that the processor:

Shall process data only on instruction of the controller including transfers to third country or an international organization;
Shall ensure confidentiality of the personal data;
Shall ensure safety and security of the personal data;
Shall agree to conditions for engaging another processor;
Shall assist in audits conducted by the controller and also in ensuring compliance to controller’s obligation to respond to data subjects who exercise their rights provided under the GDPR;
Shall at the instruction of the controller, delete, return all the personal data once services are over.

When are data processors used?

It is common practice for a data controller to engage a data processor to process personal data on its behalf. For instance, a specialist private company supplies an application or software to process the records of a public school in lieu of certain fees, a public institution engages a private company to carry out analysis and to administer social benefits to its population.

Overview of the important clauses the contract must include

All data controllers who appoint data processors to process personal data on their behalf are obliged to enter into a data processing contract. This condition is mandatory for controllers and processors in both private and public sectors and any processing contract should, at the minimum, contain the following details according to Article 28(3):

The subject matter, nature and purpose, duration of the processing;
The kind of personal data processed;
The categories of data subjects;
The rights and duties of the controller.

The following clauses that must, particularly be included in the contract are as follows:

Processing only on instructions of the controller.
Confidentiality.
Security measures.
Using sub-processors.
Rights of Data subjects.
Assisting the controller.
End-of-contract.
Inspection & Audit.

These are the standard clauses put forward in the GDPR, however, the controller and processor may decide to substitute them with their own terms.

Instructions for Processing

Under Article 28(3)(a) the contracts must include that the processor may only process personal data upon receiving instructions from the controller. Instructions can be documented using any written form capable of being saved for records, including email.

“The Parties agree that the processor shall process personal data only in accordance with the written instructions of the Controller. Additional instructions outside the scope of the written instructions required written agreement between the Parties. Controller is entitled to terminate the Agreement if Processor declines to follow the instructions requested, statutory or otherwise, by the Controller under this DPA, the processor shall then be treated as a controller in respect of that processing and will have the same liability as a controller.”

Confidentiality

The contract must include a confidentiality clause that states that the processor must ensure confidentiality of personal data, from everyone it allows to process the personal data. This contract should cover the processor’s employees and agents who have access to personal data.

“The Processor will not access or use, or disclose to any third party any personal data, except, as necessary to comply with the law or a valid binding order of the governmental body. If the governmental body sends the Processor a demand for personal data, the Processor shall attempt to redirect the governmental body to request data directly from the Controller. To achieve this the Processor may provide the Controllers basic contact information to the governmental body. Further, the Processor restricts its personnel from processing personal data without prior approval from the Controller and imposes contractual obligations upon its personnel regarding confidentiality, data protection and data security.”

Appropriate security measures

The contract requires the processor to take all security measures, both technical and organizational, important to meet the condition of Article 32 on the security of personal data being processed.

“The processor shall implement and will maintain adequate technical and organizational measures in compliance with the provisions of the GDPR in relation to the personal data. Such technical and organizational measures include pseudonymisation, encryption, backup and archiving for restoration, and regular testing, assessing and evaluation of the success of the technical and organizational measures adopted by the processor chosen by the controller. The processor shall notify the controller of a security incident without any undue delay after becoming aware of the security incident and take reasonable steps to mitigate the effects and minimise any damage.”

Using sub-processors

Article 28(3)(d) states that the processor should not engage another processor (a sub-processor) without the controller’s prior written authorisation, to give the controller a chance to object to it. The processor shall be liable to the controller for any sub-processor’s compliance with its data protection obligations.

“The controller agrees that the processor may use sub-processors to fulfil its obligations under the contract or to provide certain support services on its behalf. The processor shall inform and give notice to the controller at least 30 days before the processor engages the sub-processor. The processor shall restrict the sub-processors access to personal data only to what is necessary to maintain service and prohibit for any other purpose; enter into a written agreement with the sub-processor and impose the same contractual obligation that the processor has under its DPA; the processor shall remain responsible for its compliance of this DPA and for any acts or omissions of the sub-processors that cause the processor to breach any of the processors obligations.”

Data subjects’ rights

Under Article 28(3)(e) considering the nature of the processing, processor’s shall assist the controller by implementing technical and organisational measures, as far as possible, for fulfilling the obligation of the controller, to respond to the requests raised by the data subjects.

“The processor offers the controller to comply with its obligation towards its data subjects. Should a data subject contact the controller with regard to correction or deletion of rectification or erasure of its personal data, the processor shall use commercially reasonable efforts to fulfil such requests or forward such requests to the controller.”

End-of-contract provisions

Under Article 28(3)(g) the contract must say that at the end of the contract the processor shall promptly from the date of cessation of agreement involving the processing of personal data shall delete and procure the deletion of all copies.

“The controller has control to retrieve or delete the personal data from the possession of the processor. Following the termination of the agreement, the processor consents to delete and/or return any personal data, held in its possession for rendering of services in accordance with this agreement, as requested by the controller.”

Audits and inspections

Processor is required to make available to the Controller all information necessary to prove compliance, and shall allow and contribute to audits, including inspections, by an auditor in relation to the processing of the personal data by it under Article 28 of the regulation.

“The controller agrees to exercise any right it may have to conduct an audit or inspection of the processor. In the event, the processor declines to follow any instruction requested by the controller regarding audits and inspection, the controller is entitled to terminate this DPA and the agreement.”

Conclusion

If you are a controller who has engaged processor(s) to process personal data on your behalf or if you are a processor who has been engaged by controller(s), one should ensure that you have a legally binding contract governing this data processing arrangement.

Parties to the contract should corroborate that they are up to date and fully in compliance with the GDPR, and that they contain the provisions mandatorily required under the regulation.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Essential elements to be included in a data sub-processing agreement

By

Oishika Banerji

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article has been written by Arun Nair pursuing the Diploma in Advanced Contract Drafting, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution from LawSikho. This article has been edited by Dipshi Swara (Senior Associate, Lawsikho).

Table of Contents

Introduction

Practically most companies today whose business involves working with the data of its customers that was collected online, rely on third parties and outsource their data processing activities to them. These third parties (also called processors) to whom the personal data gets transferred for processing comprise cloud storage service provider’s, analytics provider’s email client service provider’s, cybersecurity, dedicated servers, etc and every company (hereafter referred to as data controller) who rely on such third parties to process their customer’s data are essentially required to enter into a ‘data processing agreement, to be GDPR compliant. Such data processing agreements (DPA) are binding on the data processors and set out the subject matter, duration, purpose, nature, type of data and rights and obligations of the data controllers under the contract. However, it is poignant to note that there can be multiple data processors appointed by the data controller and similarly, a lead data processor can engage multiple processors under it for specific processing of personal data, called sub-processors. Therefore, an agreement is mandatory for governing the data processor and data sub-processor relationship and such an agreement is called a data sub-processing agreement (SPA).

The entry of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR), 2018 requires all companies, who ‘process’ the personal data of the citizens of the European Union and the European Economic Area, to comply with it, in order to avoid huge fines. This article serves as an introduction to data sub processing agreements and the essential elements to be included in them.

Firstly, we will try to understand some basic concepts under the GDPR.

Basic concepts

Processing

Article 4(2) defines processing as “any operation or set of operations that is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storing, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction. ”

Personal Data

Article 4(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation defines “personal data as any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person, one who can be identified directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural, or social identity of that person.” (EU n.d.)

The key elements in the definition are:

any information
relating to
an identified or identifiable
natural person

These elements together form the crux of personal data.

In other words, it is any data that can lead to the identification of a specific person. It can be as obviously identifiable data like name, but it can also be a combination of data such as age, job, company, city, etc. as when combined can allow for identification of a person. (GDPR 4 n.d.)

Examples of Personal Data:

a name and surname;
a home address;
an email address such as [email protected];
an identification card number;
location data (for example the location data function on a mobile phone);
an Internet Protocol (IP) address;
a cookie ID;
the advertising identifier of your phone;
data held by a hospital or doctor, which could be a symbol that uniquely identifies a person. (Europa n.d.)

Examples of Data not considered as Personal Data:

a company registration number;
an email address such as [email protected];
anonymised data.

Examples of special categories of Personal Data:

racial or ethnic origin;
political opinions;
religious beliefs;
genetic data;
biometric data;
health data;
sex life or sexual orientation;
criminal offences.

Exception

Processing of special categories of personal data shall be prohibited except for in certain situations.

Data Controller

As per Article 4(7) of GDPR, controllers are “any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes, and means of the processing of personal data.”

Data Processor

Article 4(8) of GDPR defines a processor as “any natural person or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which processes personal data on behalf of the controller.”

Further, Art.(28)(1) states that, if a ‘data controller’ engages a ‘data processor’ for processing personal data, the Controller shall ensure that the processor enacts appropriate technical and organizational measures in such a manner that it meets the requirements of the legislation and safeguards the rights of data subjects.
No processor can engage the services of another processor without the specific written approval of the data controller and such processor shall state to the controller, all intended changes that may occur with the inclusion or substitution of other processors.
Data Processing Agreements are binding on the data processors and set out the subject matter, duration, purpose and nature, type of data and rights and obligations of the data controllers under the contract.
The contract or other legal act further stipulates in particular that the processor:

Shall process data only on the instruction of the controller including transfers to a third country or an international organization;
Shall ensure confidentiality of the personal data;
Shall ensure safety and security of the personal data;
Shall agree to conditions for engaging another processor;
Shall assist in audits conducted by the controller and also in ensuring compliance to the controller’s obligation to respond to data subjects who exercise their rights provided under the GDPR;
Shall at the instruction of the controller, delete, return all the personal data once services are over.

Sub-Processor

Shall mean to include any entity engaged by the Processor or any further Sub-Processor to process personal data on behalf and under the authority of the data controller.

Sub-Processing Agreement

A data sub-processing agreement (SPA) is a binding legal contract between the data processors and its sub-processors, laying down the scope, purpose, and relationship between both these parties.

An SPA is mandatory whenever a data processor engages another processor to fulfil certain specific person data processing activity with the permission of the data controller. These are signed between the processors and their sub-processors.

Essential clauses to be included in a Sub-Processing Agreement (SPA)

For the purposes of compliance with the requirements of the GDPR and to regulate the processing of personal data of the data subjects by the sub-processors the following clauses should be included in the SPA.

Scope

Any SPA should first and foremost lay down the obligations of the parties involved in the processing of personal data. The clause should mention the categories of personal data, the nature and purpose and the duration for which it will be processed by the sub-processor. Sample scope of work clause may look like such:

“The Sub-Processor shall process the Personal Data in connection with providing services to the Data Processor. Personal Data shall include IP address, machine names, usernames, location, software, and hardware details. The Sub-Processor shall collect, analyse and store the Personal Data for the specific purposes set forth by the Data Processor under the authority of the Data Controller in this SPA, for the duration of this SPA or until terminated whichever is earlier.”

Confidentiality

While entering into an agreement for data processing, the lead or initial processor should ensure that the sub-processor ensures the confidentiality of the personal data shared with it by the data controller and the data processor. Every SPA should ensure a confidentiality clause which states:

“The Sub-Processor shall take utmost care and reasonable steps to ensure that its personnel authorized to process the Personal Data on its behalf are subject to confidentiality obligations with respect to that Personal Data.”

Safety and Security

All sub-processors must ensure adequate technical and organizational measures in compliance with GDPR to safeguard the personal data that they are processing.

“The Sub-Processor agrees to implement appropriate organizational and technical measures to protect against the loss, alteration, destruction, unlawful access to the Personal Data including measures stated in Article 32 of the GDPR. Where the Sub-Processor fails to fulfil its Personal Data safety and security obligations, the Sub-Processor shall remain fully liable to the Data Processor. Further, the Sub-Processor shall promptly intimate the Data Processor of any confirmed safety and security breach incident as per its obligation under the GDPR.”

Obligation to Assist

Data processors should include a clause ascertaining necessary cooperation from the Sub-Processor in relation to fulfilment the data processors obligation under GDPR. It should thus include:

“Sub-Processor shall provide the Data Processor and the Data Controller with reasonable assistance and cooperation necessary for the fulfilment of the Data Processors and Data Controllers obligation in responding to the requests of the Data Subjects, keeping the Personal Data secure, conducting periodic data protection impact assessment and for conducting an audit in compliance with the GDPR provisions.”

Protocol with regards to Personal Data

Parties to the SPA must decide on the arrangement with regards to the personal data that is being processed once the duration of the SPA gets over or the SPA gets terminated. The clause must specify how the data is to be handled thereafter. “Upon the expiry or termination of the SPA, the Sub-Processor shall delete and/or return, at the Data Processors and Data Controllers election, all the Personal Data in the possession or control of the Sub-Processor. The Sub-Processor may retain the Personal Data only if mandated under any act, legislation or in compliance with any applicable law in force at that point. The Data Sub-Processor shall not retain the Personal Data for any other purpose.”

Permissions

The SPA must be drafted to include that the sub-processor seeks necessary approvals and permission, in writing, from the data processor and data controllers prior to engaging a new sub-processor and transfer of personal data to a third country or an international organization.

“The Sub-Processor shall obtain written consent of the Data Processor and Data Controller in the event: it engages a new sub-processor and/or replaces an existing sub-processor. The Sub-Processor shall further obtain prior permission or consent of the Data Processor and Data Controller in writing before it transfers to, shares the Personal Data with an international organization or a foreign country.”

Conclusion

The General Data Protection Regulations require that parties who process personal data must provide adequate safeguards and security in accordance with the provision of the legislation. These contracts make it possible to show that the data sub-processors understand their obligations and responsibilities and agree to comply with relevant requirements under the legislation.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Shabbir Hussain v. State of Madhya Pradesh : whether mere harassment amounts to abetment of suicide u/s 306 IPC

By

Sneha Mahawar

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article is written by Akshita Gupta, from Symbiosis Law School, Noida. This article discusses the recent judgment of Shabbir Hussain v State of Madhya Pradesh (2021) and the relevance of Section 306 of IPC,1860.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Abetment is the act of inciting a person to do something or the mental process of instigating a person to do something. According to Section 107 which defines the abetment of thing, a person is liable for abetment if he/she instigates any person to do that thing, engages in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing with one or more other individuals, or intentionally assists the doing of that thing by an act or illegal omission.

The Supreme Court in the case of Shabbir Hussain v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2021) held that the allegations against the accused were of harassment of the deceased and that there was no further evidence on record proving abetment. Mere allegations of harassment would not amount to abetment of suicide with no material on record which indicates abetment. In this article, this case has been discussed in detail.

Shabbir Hussain v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2021)

Facts of the case

Roshan Bee, the deceased Firoz Khan’s wife, moved back to her parents’ house on September 10, 2014, due to a matrimonial disagreement. Firoz Khan poisoned himself and left four suicide notes at his home on September 22, 2014, because the accused refused to send his wife and daughter with him, and as a result, they are to blame for his death.

Shabbir Hussain, the brother of the deceased, filed a case under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 against the respondent. After the investigation, a charge sheet was filed after which the trial was commenced against the respondent. The accused petitioned the High Court of Madhya Pradesh for a retrial, which was granted.

Further, an appeal was made before the Supreme Court, it was claimed while referring to the case of Amalendu Pal v. State of West Bengal (2010) that the abetment of suicide by the accused is prima facie evidence of harassment by them, which encouraged the deceased’s suicide. Also, as stated in the judgment of the case Rajesh v State of Haryana (2019), conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable based solely on the allegation of harassment without some positive action on the part of the accused close to the time of the occurrence that led or compelled the individual to commit suicide.

Issue of the case

The main issue that was raised in this case was:

Whether mere harassment amounts to abetment of suicide under Section 306 Indian Penal Code,1860?

Relevant provisions

Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code,1860

If a person commits suicide, anyone who abets suicide will be punished with imprisonment for a term up to 10 years, as well as a fine. Abetment of suicide is a cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offense that is prosecuted in a Sessions Court. To be found guilty under Section 306, there must be not only a clear intention to commit the crime but also an active act that leads the deceased to commit suicide. Such an act must be coerced, leading the deceased to believe he or she has no other choice but to commit suicide.

Essential elements

To get a successful conviction under this Section, three conditions must be fulfilled:

The deceased must have committed suicide,
The accused under this Section must have abetted or instigated him/her to perform such an act,
The accused’s alleged involvement must be direct.

The essence of the Section 306 offense is abetment. The term abetment is defined in Section 107. This Section will always be at the heart of Section 306, and the prosecution will have to show the abetment done by the person because of which the deceased commited suicide since they were not left with any other option.

Arguments raised by the parties

The arguments raised by the petitioners were :

Allowing the criminal revision was a mistake by the High Court, especially after ten witnesses had previously been questioned.
The counsel cited the suicide notes made by the deceased Firoz Khan to corroborate his claims that Firoz was harassed by the respondent, prompting him to commit suicide.
The counsel contended that the respondent’s abetment of the charge of suicide is prima facie established because the respondent’s harassment aided the deceased’s suicide.

Judgment of the Court

The Supreme Court held that mere harassment would not amount to an offense of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. While referring to the case of Chitresh Kumar Chopra v State ( Government of NCT of Delhi) (2009), the Court went on to say that abetment occurs when one person instigates another to do something and that the instigation can be inferred when the accused has created conditions in which the deceased has no choice but to commit suicide as a result of his or her actions or omissions.

The appeal was thus dismissed, with the Court noting that the allegation made was the deceased had been tormented by the accused, but there is no further evidence on record to suggest abetment.

Ratio decidendi

The Supreme Court laid down the following proposition to determine mere harassment does not amount to abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC,1860:

In legal terms, determining whether a death is a suicide or not is a determination of fact, which means the evidence must be analyzed before a decision can be made. In everyday speech, the term “suicide” is loosely applied to any act of self-destruction, although suicide is never assumed. When a deceased person is thought to have known the likely consequences of what self-harm is about to do to them and yet commits it on purpose, it is considered suicide.
Once this is established, the intent of the person charged with abetment of suicide is investigated.
Abetment by a person is when one person instigates another to do something.
Instigation can be inferred when the accused has created conditions in which the deceased has no choice but to commit suicide as a result of his or her actions or omissions.
The claims against Respondent in this instance are that they harassed the deceased but there is no further evidence on file that suggests abetment.

Obiter dictum

The Supreme Court while dismissing the petition has mentioned that the High Court has not made any mistake while allowing the criminal revision.

Case analysis

As per the above-mentioned judgment, it is clear that to hold someone liable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, firstly there must be a case of suicide. Secondly, the person who is stated to have abetted the crime of suicide must have taken an active role in the commission of the said offense by initiating or doing something to facilitate the commission of suicide. Abetment to suicide has to make the deceased left with no other option but to commit suicide. In this case, since there was no such evidence to the fact that the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide, therefore, she could not be held liable under the same. The conviction is sustainable under this Section if there are some constructive actions on the part of the accused close to the time of the incident that led or compelled the individual to commit suicide.

Conclusion

Abetment of suicide is when an individual commits suicide when he has been instigated or has been abetted to commit suicide by another person. Since the scope of the rule is confined to only three categories, the accused can simply circumvent the criminal provisions dealing with such offenses. As a result, it is necessary that the provisions dealing with the charge of abetment be amended in such a way that offenders are unable to avoid the laws, change cases to suit their own needs, and escape punishment.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Artificial intelligence and constitutional morality : the complementary elements

By

Sneha Mahawar

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article is written by Gyaaneshwar Joshi, a student of the Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. This article discusses the benefits of implementing Artificial Intelligence in the Indian Judiciary and why it needs to be acquired under a strong legal framework.

Table of Contents

Introduction

“Technology will be the main driver of this change. And, in the long run, we will neither need nor want professionals to work in the way that they did in the twentieth century and before.”

Richard Susskind

Machine learning has shown its potential to be used in litigation. The use of Artificial Intelligence nowadays seems to be conducive to legal practices. Machine learning involves data analysis and finding out the existing data, the same exercise is undertaken by the legal practitioners.

Former Chief Justice of India, S.A. Bobde during his tenure has stressed the need for having a structured and well-reformed Artificial Intelligence (AI) system in courtrooms which in no way impedes or undermines any legal rights afforded to citizens. The use of Artificial Intelligence in the judiciary becomes more compatible when it aligns with constitutional morality and is equally governed by ethical, legal, and constitutional principles.

AI and Indian legal system : friends or foes

AI is used by several courts in foreign countries, primarily to increase administrative efficacy and to supplement human decision-making in the courts. In India, the Supreme Court began using AI in November 2019, when the translation tool called SUVAAS (Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software) was incorporated in its workings to expedite the translation of judicial orders and rulings from English to nine vernacular languages – Hindi, Kannada, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi, Punjabi, Gujarati, Malayalam, and Bengali – which will be further extended.

The Supreme Court has been timely experimenting with several artificial intelligence tools, the purpose of which is not to replace human minds but to use technology in a limited manner for gathering information, data, facts about the case, and helping the judges to smoothly process it. The Supreme Court has been using several web-based applications like ‘LIMBS’ which was designed to provide help in the Supreme Court’s working for monitoring cases involving the central government. This application was an initiative of the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice, and aims to digitize the legal process and to monitor the entire life cycle of any case. In May 2020, the Supreme Court indigenously developed software called ‘SCI-Interact’ to facilitate paperless work in all of its 17 benches. The primary purpose of the software is to provide ease to the judges to be able to access files, annexures to the petitions, and make soft notes on computers by themselves. This software helps in the decision-making process and speedy disposal of cases with a less human touch. It comprises five components that are installed to facilitate the workings in the courts:

Scanned copies of pending cases,
E-filing of fresh cases,
IT hardware,
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) network with dual redundancy,
Security audit.

AI Portal SUPACE

In April 2021, the Supreme Court’s Artificial Intelligence committee launched an artificial intelligence portal called SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency). The specially designed system was launched by the former CJI S.A. Bobde, who called it a “perfect blend of human intelligence and machine learning.” This tool helps in gathering relevant information that a judge has to require for its case. The tool collects relevant facts and laws and presents them before a judge. However, the software will not provide justice to any seeker because it is solely the responsibility of the judge to use its discretion while delivering any judgment.

Potential of artificial intelligence in the Indian Judiciary

In 2019, the Supreme Court constituted a “Supreme Court Artificial Intelligence committee”, chaired by the first-ever head of the committee, Justice S.A. Bobde. The committee is presently headed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud. The committee was formed to use AI as humanitarian assistance in the judicial domain for enhancing the efficiency and productivity of justice delivery.

The implementation of AI in the courts can be beneficial for the Indian judicial system in several ways:

It will improve administrative efficiency in courts and facilitate the decision-making process for judges and lawyers.
It will provide ease in finding past precedents to accumulate crucial points of law and facts.
To expedite the judicial process by providing comprehensive legal briefs on cases and doing pertinent legal research.
Efficient use of AI can help in eliminating the longstanding problem of judicial backlogs from the Indian courts.

The Supreme Court AI committee is aiming for the potential use of software that can provide a better and easier way to save time and improve the efficiency of Indian courts. Former CJI S.A. Bobde has always supported AI technology, he explained the apprehensions that were raised when computerization was first introduced in the Bombay High Court. After the technology was implemented in the workings of the Bombay High Court, the workload of Registry officials was reduced which enabled the staff to reach home early.

Incumbent Chief Justice N.V. Ramana, in his speech delivered at the launch of SUPACE portal, said that introduction of AI is a big step in ensuring access to justice and will help in delivering justice to needy people. He corroborated that AI tools can be useful for saving time in finding the facts regarding a criminal matter and will be helpful in speedy disposal of motor accidents claims, which is the main reason for the increasing pendency of cases in the various courts.

AI has found its way into our daily lives, and therefore the decision of the Supreme court to form an AI committee in 2019 has cleared the vision that Indian courts are ready to embrace the modern technology of machine learning to enhance the productivity of the justice delivery system. The AI is worthwhile when it is made to supplement and not supplant judges, and only aid certain decisions but not make significant decisions.

The need to uphold constitutional morality even when AI is put to use

Artificial Intelligence is more than a legal technology and could be the next great hope that will revolutionize the legal profession. In India, the use of AI is still in the nascent stage and will take some more time to be effectively implemented in the courtrooms. To blend AI with constitutional morality, the autonomy and discretion of judges will have to remain intact with no interference from the technology. The same concept was reiterated by the Former CJI S.A. Bobde in his speech at the virtual launch of Vidhi centre for legal policy’s strategy paper on “Responsible Artificial Intelligence for the Indian Justice system”.

The most common concern about the use of AI in the judiciary can be acknowledged from the phrase garbage in, garbage out, which means that flawed and incorrect input data will produce faulty output. In the context of the judiciary, the faulty output may result in bias in the decision-making of the courts. There is a fear that the involvement of tech-giants who develop the AI systems may create an ‘organized bias’ which could become an additional threat to judicial independence. This is the main reason why several legal experts are against the implementation of AI because they fear that technology can influence the judge’s decision-making by showing biased content that can sway the judge’s opinion by receiving only such research items that favour one side.

When the same issue was raised before the former CJI SA Bobde, he said that the technology should be used in a way to expedite access to information regarding the case, while the autonomy and discretion of the judge in deciding cases should not be harmed. He commented that “A system of justice can’t accept that a machine, however intelligent, will take the decision.” Judiciary is a safeguard to citizen’s rights, therefore, if AI tools should be taken into use, caution is a must because even a small bias can create an avalanche of issues in the decision-making of the court.

The future of AI and the Indian legal system : presence or absence of morality

AI-based technologies are used by legal experts in several nations. For example, Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) is the first major application of AI in legal practice. TAR is mainly used for organizing, analyzing, and searching large data sets for e-discovery or record investigations. Currently, some Indian legal firms like Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas have started to adopt major applications for AI to enhance their legal practices. The firm is working in collaboration with various start-ups to adopt AI-based solutions.

In India, AI is presenting itself as an efficient tool for legal practice. Several applications like Lex Machina, which is owned by LexisNexis, are facilitating legal practitioners to work efficiently in the field of intellectual property litigation. Similarly, Ravel Law, which is another application owned by LexisNexis, is currently being used to provide legal analytics of judicial opinions to predict how a specific judge may rule in a case.

Artificial Intelligence can be beneficial to make a change in the way lawyers think, the way they do business, and the way they interact with clients. Several courts in foreign countries are going towards adopting and introducing AI in the legal field with the hope that it will revolutionize their legal profession. For example, the American Bar Association has inserted a clause under its model rules of professional conduct, which reads as- lawyers shall be competent and must keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with the relevant technology. Therefore, the advent of technology in the legal arena can be taken as a major step towards working on closing the gap of access to justice for civilians to provide betterment and welfare of society.

Countries and their bond with the AI system in their legal profession

Various judicial systems have implemented AI as a tool for their justice system reforms. Several countries are using technology in litigation for the purpose to develop their litigation systems.

China

The Shanghai High People’s court has developed an intelligent assistive case handling system for criminal cases called ‘the 206 system’ which enables the complete case handling procedures of criminal cases in Shanghai. This technology deals with online form case filing, investigation, court trial, approval for an arrest, parole, etc.

United States

The United States is using AI as a risk assessment tool. The US-based law firm, Baker Hostetler has employed the world’s first AI robot ‘Ross’ which was developed by the International Business Machines (IBM). This robot is the world’s first artificially intelligent attorney. The ‘Ross’ robot assists the lawyers in their research work, gathering evidence and drawing highly relevant and evidence-based answers for inferences and returns.

Brazil

In 2020, the Supreme Court of Brazil implemented an advanced AI system called VICTOR. This software has immensely helped the Supreme Court in tackling backlogs of cases. With the help of this software, the court has reduced the time of hearing the petition because the software decreased the initial analysis time of hearing the petitioned case from 40 minutes to just a few seconds.

Columbia

In 2019, the Colombian Constitutional Court implemented the AI solution called ‘Prometea’ to resolve the inefficiency and delays of the cases within the constitutional court. The software has created a milestone of solving a case in less than 20 seconds, with a success rate of 96%.

Singapore

The Supreme Court of Singapore has deployed a speech translation system in the court that utilizes neural networks trained with language models to transcribe court hearings instantaneously. This tool helps the judges to review oral testimonies instantly in the courtroom.

Conclusion

Since AI provides a wide scope of knowledge and is growing faster, there is no reason why the Indian legal system should lag. To better implement AI in the judicial domain, there is an emergent need of reskilling the existing and future workforce. Currently, several online dispute resolution tools are being developed that completely circumvented the judicial process. Similarly, in light of COVID-19 and Supreme Court’s direction to promote technology, an online dispute resolution platform called SAMA was introduced in August 2020 to support the first ever online Lok Adalat in India. Sama is providing technical support to State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs) across the country for keeping the wheel of justice rolling with an assurance that access to justice continues in the time of pandemic.

The further development of AI tools might help the court in case management and early redressal of issues. However, the judiciary needs to ensure that the use of AI in the judicial domain shall be compatible with the basic fundamental principles of our Constitution.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Challenges faced by the Indian media with respect to media laws and ethics

By

Sneha Mahawar

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article is written by Akshita Gupta, pursuing BBA LLB from Symbiosis Law School Noida. This article discusses the current challenges faced by the Indian media with respect to media laws and ethics.

Table of Contents

Introduction

The term “media” refers to “medium,” which refers to communication, or the way of expression. Not only does the media play an essential part in democracy, but it also entertains the public with cinema, music, dance, theatre, and other forms of entertainment. The media can be divided into three categories:

Print media: Newspapers, books, press releases, pamphlets, magazines, etc.
Electronic media: Films, radio, and television, etc.
New age media: Films, web series, and music released via Over the Top (OTT) platforms, which can be accessed via the internet or other ways.

The fourth pillar of democracy takes satisfaction in being fair, neutral, and delivering the truth when media influence expands beyond human reach. Notwithstanding, as recent events demonstrate, the media is confronted with several challenges that jeopardize its very own function, including the current test of nationalism in the name of religion, hate crimes, and social evils; the media has played a devastating role, whether it is through the propagation of religious ideologies, poor reporting in sensitive cases, or investigative cowboy journalism that harkens back to the days of the old media.

Important media laws

From the British era, certain regulations have been enacted to regulate media activities and to protect the freedom of media. Certain important laws are as follows:

First Press Regulation, 1799;
Gagging Act,1857;
Press and Regulations of Books Act,1867;
Indian Press Act,1910;
Vernacular Press Act,1878;
Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act,1956;
Parliamentary Proceedings Act,1956;
Press Council Of India Act,1965;
Delivery of Books and Newspapers Act, 1954;
Prasar Bharati Act,1990.

Challenges faced by Indian media

Paid news

Paid news is the unethical media law practice where the articles that are published under the print and electronic media are in the favor of the institutions that have paid for it. It is considered an advertisement without a tag. Further, it is a malpractice since it tends to deceive the citizens by not letting them know the actual facts of the case. Secondly, the payment modes used in this violates the tax and election spending laws. It is an issue during elections because the media has a direct influence on voters.

In the case of Smt Umlesh Yadav v Election Commission of India (2013), the Election Commission disqualified Smt. Umlesh Yadav, a sitting MLA from Uttar Pradesh, for three years under Section 10A of the Representation of People Act, 1951, after she failed to furnish a correct account of her expenses under Section 77 of the Act. She took the matter to the Allahabad High Court, which affirmed the ECI’s findings and barred her from running the office.

Cross-media ownership

A situation in which a single corporate entity owns numerous types of media enterprises is known as cross- media ownership. Print, radio, television, movies, and online media sites are examples of the types of cross-media ownership. In our country, a monopoly in the sector of media ownership has had a severe impact on the quality of media freedom. This monopoly has not been scrutinized by the public and is also unregulated. The law must strike a balance between broadcast and distribution in order to prevent single-handed control and ownership of both. Another problem with this monopoly is the concentration of power in a single media entity in a given zone. Furthermore, there are no cross-media limits in the counter for print, television, or radio.

Regulations for the government-owned media

Both the government and the private sector own media organizations in India. Government-owned media, such as All India Radio, Doordarshan, the Directorate of Field Publicity, the Press Information Bureau, and others, play a critical role because the issues they handle are not widely covered by commercial media. Government-owned media can serve as an impartial filter for changing the public’s perception of government policies and their implementation, as well as a medium via which news regarding developmental projects is communicated to the general public.

Government-owned media, on the other hand, is not considered as sufficiently independent of the government. As a result, the reliability of the pro-government stories they produce may be questioned, especially if they solely describe official activities rather than making an impartial assessment of their efficacy. Furthermore, as compared to private media, there are concerns about the quality of such government media. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting organized an Expert Committee in January 2013 to assess Prasar Bharti’s institutional framework, including its relationship with the government. On January 24, 2014, the Expert Committee submitted its report, which included proposals for making Prasar Bharti administratively and financially independent of the government.

Media and individual privacy

The growth of media has unquestionably resulted in a decrease in an individual’s privacy. Although the right to privacy is not clearly defined in the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court concluded in Justice K S Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) that it is a basic right and is an integral aspect of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Though the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, permits the press to reveal facts of essential public interest, it frequently leads to an invasion of privacy. The right to privacy has been affirmed in the instance of Nira Radia tapes.

Trial by media and right of the accused

When a critical issue is brought before the court, there is an expected rise in interest among the public. Always on the lookout for exciting news, the media, including newspapers, television stations, and news websites, begin posting their own versions of events. It’s known as investigative journalism. “Media Trial” or “Trial by Media” refers to the impact of media coverage on an individual via newspapers and television in developing an impression of innocence or guilt before a court of law delivers its decision. Excessive media coverage of the accused or suspect prior to a court of law trial either incriminates a fair trial or characterizes the accused or suspect as the one who has unquestionably committed the crime; this amounts to undue interference with the “administration of justice,” necessitating contempt of court proceedings against the media. Unfortunately, the norms established to control journalism and journalism practices are insufficient to avoid the infringement of civil rights.

The Supreme Court declared in Saibal Kumar Gupta and Ors. v. B.K. Sen and Anr., 1961, that a newspaper intruding into a crime and conducting an independent investigation for which the accused or suspect has been apprehended and then publishing the results of that inquiry would be mischievous. This is deceptive because when one of the country’s regular tribunals is conducting a trial, a trial by newspapers must be outlawed. This is founded on the belief that a newspaper’s investigation tends to obstruct the process of justice, regardless of whether the investigation prejudices the accused or the prosecution.

Influence of media on the accused

If the media has already painted a suspect or accused as guilty before the trial in court, there is a risk that the accused may be severely prejudiced.
Even if a suspect or accused person is cleared by the Court after due process, the acquittal may not be beneficial in rehabilitating the accused’s reputation in society.
Overstated and unfair media coverage, describing the defendant as guilty even while the verdict is still pending, amounts to improper influence over the “administration of justice,” necessitating a contempt of court action against the media.

Influence of media on judges

Even judges are subject to criticism, which might be directed at their judicial conduct or their conduct in a purely personal capacity. However, it is a cause for concern when the criticism levelled against judges is unfounded or ill-informed, as this has the potential to erode public confidence in the court.
A judge must defend himself against media pressure that can ‘unknowingly’ affect juries or judges, and judges, like all humans, are susceptible to such indirect pressures, at least subconsciously or unconsciously.

The Supreme Court declared in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi, 1997, that a trial by electronic media, press or public agitation is contrary to the rule of law and might result in a miscarriage of justice.

Influence of media on the witness

If the witness’ identity is disclosed, the witness may face pressure from the authorities as well as the accused or his associates.
Early on, the witness wants to disengage and get out of the commotion as quickly as possible.
The witness’s safety is a critical concern. This raises the question of whether a hostile witness’ evidence is admissible, as well as if the law should be changed to prevent witnesses from changing their claims.

The Law Commission of India’s 200th report, “Trial by Media: Free Speech and Fair Trial under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973,” elaborates on numerous aspects of the rights relating to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of fair trial, which was released in August 2006, under the chairmanship of Justice M. Jagannadha Rao.

Lack of diversity

Diversity and cultural inclusion in the media is a hot topic, and many people believe that representation is at an all-time high; nonetheless, there is still a long way to go, before individual differences are genuinely represented and accepted as the norm in the media.

A lot of studies and polls on the representation provided by news channels have been done in recent years by the Network of Women in Media India. They’ve arrived at a straightforward conclusion: upper-caste men are vastly overrepresented, whereas women and lower castes are underrepresented. According to research by the Network of Women in Media India, women made up only 13.7 percent of the panelists in prime-time news debates across 28 stations and 11 languages.

As journalists from around the country converged in New Delhi for the Media Rumble, the campaign ‘Who Tells our Stories Matters: Representation of marginalized caste groups in Indian Newsrooms’ was launched. The following are some of the report’s significant findings:

Dalits and Adivasis account for less than 5% of all articles published in English newspapers. Hindi newspapers perform a little better, with roughly 10% of the market.
People from the higher castes write about 72 percent of bylined pieces on news websites.
Only 10 of the 972 items on the cover pages of the 12 periodicals under investigation are regarding caste concerns.

The lack of diversity in the news is concerning, as it contributes to a decline in overall news quality. When newsrooms are made up of only a few communities, they are unable to cover a wide range of subjects and provide the sorting platform that they are required to do so. Only 10 of the 972 cover pieces in publications throughout the study period were about caste discrimination, according to the Newslaundry analysis.

Due to a lack of diverse caste representation in the press, these concerns received little attention. Minorities are alienated by such under-representation, and their trust in the media is eroded. When people feel alienated, politicians may easily trash the media, as Trump did with his Fake News Media rhetoric.

The one-dimensional nature of news opinions is another key issue that occurs as a result of a lack of diversity on news channels. Because newsrooms are largely dominated by upper-caste males, reports regarding lower castes sometimes fail to investigate the complexities of the subject, instead of speaking in broad generalizations. Rather than informing and educating individuals, it forces archaic narratives and stereotypes on them.

The media as an institution begins to crumble in the absence of diversity. Instead of serving as the famous fourth pillar of democracy, it becomes a platform for a few privileged persons on the periphery. Newsrooms must address these diversity issues in order to function efficiently.

Defamation

Defamation is a serious problem in journalism that needs to be resolved. The cases of phoney sting operations or media trials lend validity to claims of irresponsible journalism. Threats of legal action under defamation laws, which include punitive penalties, have a “chilling effect” on the publication of free and independent news pieces, putting undue pressure on journalists and publishing houses. Any changes to India’s defamation legislation must strike a balance between these two considerations. Civil defamation is currently dealt with under tort law, whereas criminal defamation is a crime under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.

In India, there is no special status for journalists when it comes to defamation laws. Although the press has the right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, defamation is deemed a justification for a fair restriction of this right under Art. 19(2) of the Constitution. The decriminalization of defamation as it pertains to journalists has been demanded in the past by organizations such as the Editors’ Guild of India.

Publication and contempt of court

An ethical media is supposed to take into account the public’s trust in it, as well as the confidence and faith with which the common man/public blindly accepts the reality of the news it publishes. This necessitates the existence of dependable media. When reporting on a crime or any news related to it, responsible media should follow specific guidelines:

Before the case is reported/published and viewed by all, the accuracy of the case must be maintained and confirmed.
Any writing that is opinion-based, i.e. favouring or defaming any individual or party, must be avoided at all costs.
The right to privacy must not be violated.
When it comes to reporting judicial events, accuracy is crucial.
It is forbidden to disseminate reports based on mere suspicion or personal judgment.
Appreciation of a violent act must always be avoided.
The heading should not be made to be sensational or provocative on purpose; it should be appropriate for the content printed beneath it.
In the event of an error, a correction should be issued as soon as possible.

Civil contempt

According to Section 2(b) of Contempt of Courts Act,1971, civil contempt is willful disobedience of a court’s judgment or decree or wilful breach of a court’s undertaking. As per the definition, there are two essentials to constitute civil contempt of the Court :

Firstly, any disobedience to the judgments, orders, writs, decree, direct or any other process of a court or an undertaking given to the court.
Secondly, disobedience must be willful, deliberate, and intentional.

No court, including a contempt court, has the authority to consider minor details or technicalities when determining fault with the conduct of the person against whom contempt proceeding is taken. If the order has been largely followed and a reasonable explanation has been given for the delay, the contempt charge will be dismissed because the breach was not willful and deliberate.

Criminal contempt

The publication of any matter that either scandalizes or lowers the authority of the court, or that such matter interferes or prejudices any judicial proceeding, interferes or obstructs the administration of justice in any way, is characterized as criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of Contempt of Courts Act,1971.

Social media and Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000

The legislature enacted the Information Technology Act of 2000 to safeguard citizens from data privacy violations. This Act does not eliminate the risk of cybercrime, but it does lessen it. Section 66A of IT Act, 2000 stipulated three years imprisonment, if a social media remark causes “annoyance” or was considered “grossly insulting”. In March 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in the Shreya Singhal case, heard by Justice Rohinton F. Nariman, that the provision was unclear and drafted arbitrarily. Irrespective of this Section being struck down completely, people are still accused under the same. As per PUCL, 745 cases of Section 66A of IT Act are still active and pending across 11 states of India. This act has made freedom of speech and expression difficult on social media. There has been a case where two professors have been arrested for posting a cartoon critiquing a politician. Two young girls from Maharashtra were arrested in another incident, one for writing a Facebook status about the catastrophic shut down of Mumbai due to the death of a popular politician, and the other for ‘liking’ the status post.

On the same hand, social media has frequently been used to incite ethnic and communal violence, such as in August 2012 when false rumours on the internet led to an evacuation of North-eastern migrants from South India. Despite the fact that the Print and Electronic Media Standards and Regulation Bill, 2012 recommended the creation of a media regulating authority, it was never introduced. The Cyber Appellate Tribunal is competent under the current Act to deal with complaints under the Act, however, it is mostly limited to accusations of fraud and hacking.

Conclusion

The requirement of the hour is to revise the regulations in such a way that all lost grounds and failures can be effectively reinstituted. A number of outstanding bills, as well as the recommendation, must be passed as soon as possible. There must be a clear understanding of what issues will be addressed in the Press Council of India (PCI Act) laws and how they will be implemented efficiently. Furthermore, there must be a balance between freedom of expression and speech restrictions. Management and officials must ensure reporters’ and journalists’ freedom and protection so that they can cover the news without being influenced by political, governmental, or wealthy influential people and groups. The Press Council should develop ideas in collaboration with well-known journalism training institutes to ensure that journalists are well-versed in ethical practice. What remains now is for the government to put the Council’s recommendations and guidance into action, which has the potential to make a significant difference in the system’s correction.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Everything you need to know about personal data under GDPR

By

Oishika Banerji

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article has been written by Arun Nair pursuing the Diploma in Advanced Contract Drafting, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution from LawSikho. This article has been edited by Dipshi Swara (Senior Associate, Lawsikho).

Table of Contents

Introduction

Your personal data is like an asset or a property that belongs to you, and you have all the rights, titles, and interests in your data. However, all this information gathered about an individual is just waiting to be exploited by someone out there. For instance, we avail the ‘free-services’ of big tech companies with billions of dollars of valuation like Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and grant them permission to collect, store and process this ‘all-powerful’ information about us. The digital devices, IoT’s, smartphones are all running on software’s and apps provided by these companies, the majority of which are free for use. We don’t pay for these apps in money, we pay using personal data, and it is far more valuable than any subscription fee that you can pay. Companies treat this information about individuals as a product and quantify it. This information is then sold to advertisers, market research firms and governments, albeit without our knowledge and consent, which in turn generates revenue for them. There is a hugely lucrative business in the area of personal data, and the government’s and regulatory bodies of any country should keep a tight vigil to prevent its misuse by bringing in licit and warranted legislation. This article is aimed at explaining the concept of personal data according to the General Data Protection Regulation legislation of the European Union. It will also cover related topics laid down under the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation.

General Data Protection Regulation

The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation was adopted on 14 April 2016 and became enforceable beginning 25 May 2018. It replaced the Data Protection Directive (1995). The EU designed GDPR to harmonise data privacy laws across its member countries as well as to provide better protection and rights to its citizens. It is a law aimed at data protection and privacy and addresses the transfer of personal data outside the EU. It laid down the rules for the safeguarding of ‘fundamental rights’ and ‘freedom’ of a natural person with-regard-to the processing of personal data and their right to the protection of personal data. Simply put, if an organization collects, records, stores, organizes, re-structures, adapts or alters, retrieves, uses, discloses by transmission, dissemination, restricts, erases or destructs the personal data of the people in the EU (Data Subjects), then you must comply with the GDPR or else, face huge fines.

What is personal data?

Article 4(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation defines “Personal Data as any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person, one who can be identified directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical. The physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural, or social identity of that person.” (EU n.d.)

The key elements in the definition are any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person. These elements together form the crux of personal data. In other words, it is any data that can lead to the identification of a specific person. It can be as obviously identifiable data like a name, but it can also be a combination of data such as age, job, company, city, etc. as when combined can allow for identification of a person. (GDPR 4 n.d.)

Examples of Personal Data:

a name and surname;
a home address;
an email address such as [email protected];
an identification card number;
location data (for example the location data function on a mobile phone);
an Internet Protocol (IP) address;
a cookie ID;
the advertising identifier of your phone;
data held by a hospital or doctor, which could be a symbol that uniquely identifies a person. (Europa n.d.)

Examples of Data not considered as Personal Data:

a company registration number;
an email address such as [email protected];
anonymised data.

Examples of special categories of Personal Data:

racial or ethnic origin;
political opinions;
religious beliefs;
genetic data;
biometric data;
health data;
sex life or sexual orientation;
criminal offences.

Processing of special categories of Personal Data shall be prohibited except for in certain situations. (GDPR9 n.d.)

Conditions for processing of Personal Data

Article 5 of GDPR holds the Data Controller responsible and accountable for compliance with the following principles related to data processing. It states that Personal Data shall be:

processed in a lawful, fair and transparent manner (lawfulness, fairness & transparency);
collected for specific purposes only and not further processed for an unrelated purpose (purpose limitation);
limited to the minimum and collected only up to the extent that is absolutely necessary (data minimisation);
accurate, kept up to date and rectified without delay (accuracy);
stored for no longer than is necessary for processing it (storage limitation);
protected against unauthorized and unlawful processing and against accidental loss, destruction or damage using appropriate technical and organizational measures (integrity & confidentiality).

Processing of Personal Data shall be considered lawful if at least one of the following applies:

that the Data Subjects have given their consent for doing so;
it is necessary for the performance of a contract, to which the Data Subjects are party to;
when Data Controller has to comply with a legal obligation as laid down by EU or member states;
in order to protect the interests of the Data Subjects or any other natural person;
public interest matter as determined by EU or member states;
for the purpose of legitimate interests of the Data Controller or of a third party.

When the permission to process the Personal Data is granted on the basis of consent from the Data Subject, the following conditions have to be met:

The request for consent shall be presented in clear and plain language in an intelligible and easily accessible form. Any infringement to this shall not be binding.
the Data Subjects can withdraw their consent at any time.
the Data Controller should be able to demonstrate or give evidence of the consent, received from the Data Subject, to process their Personal Data.
consent should be freely given.

Transfer of Personal Data to International Companies or Other Countries

when there is a transfer of personal data to a third country or an international organization the commission decides that the third country or territory or the international organization has an adequate level of data protection mechanism as the GDPR;
transfer of data to a third country or international organizations allowed only if the controller and processor provides safeguards, rights and legal remedies for the Data Subjects;
legally binding corporate rules shall apply to the concerned enterprises engaged in economic activities including their employees. It shall also confer enforceable rights on the Data Subjects w.r.t processing of their personal data.

Further, any judgment or a court or tribunal or decision of an administrative authority of a third country requiring transfer or disclosure of personal data may be enforceable if there is an international agreement in force between the member state or union and the third country requesting.

Rights of the Data Subjects with respect to their Personal Data

Where Personal Data relating to Data Subjects are collected from the Data Subjects, the Data Controllers are bound to provide the Data Subjects with information such as identity and contact details of the controller or of his representatives, contact details of the Data Protection Officer (DPO), purposes of the processing for which data is being sought; whether the controller intends to transfer data to a third country or international organizations. The controller shall provide the information within a reasonable time, generally one month.

The Data Subjects shall have the following privacy rights

Right of Access – Data subjects can submit requests to access any individual data that an organisation might be holding. The organisation in general will have one month to produce this information. The following data can be requested from the data controller:

Confirming whether any personal data concerning the individual is being processed
If personal data is being processed, a copy of the same can be requested
Other additional information like, purpose of processing, category of personal data, particular recipients in third countries or international organisations, and the retention period.

Right to Rectification – Data Controllers and Data Processors to rectify any inaccurate personal data concerning the Data Subjects. The Data Subjects shall also have the right to have incomplete data completed;

Right to Erasure – also known as the right to be forgotten, provides that the Data Controller shall have the obligation to erase Personal Data without any delay when: the data is no longer required for which they were collected, consent was withdrawn, objection by Data Subjects, unlawful processing of data, compliance to a legal obligation in the EU;

Right to Restrict Processing – when the accuracy of the data is contested, the processing is unlawful, the controller no longer requires the personal data for processing and when there is an objection from the Data Subject;

Right of Data Portability – to receive the personal data concerning the Data Subject in a commonly used, structured, readable format to transmit it to another controller without hindrance;

Right to Object – on matters relating to the Data Subjects particular situation, at any time to processing of data concerning him or her. The controller shall no longer process the data unless it demonstrates compelling grounds for doing so.

Restriction on the rights of Data Subjects

European Union or the EU Member State Law may restrict by way of legislation the scope of the obligations and rights provided to the data subjects, albeit such restrictions respects the rights and freedoms, but is necessary, and proportionate measure to safeguard: national security, defence, public security, investigation, protection of judicial proceedings, protection of rights and freedoms of other data subjects, and enforcement of civil law.

Safeguards and derogations relating to processing

With respect for the freedom of Data Subjects and their rights, data safeguards; both technical and organizational measures, and data minimisation principle, the legislation allows for moderation in the rights of Data Subjects, for archiving of Personal Data for the following reasons:

Public Interest;
Historical Research;
Scientific Research;
Statistical Purposes.

Subject to safeguard measures like pseudonymization and encryption, provided that the purposes mentioned above can be fulfilled and at the same time does not permit the identification of Data Subjects.

Landmark judgment in data privacy and protection

The case of Max Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner involved a complaint by a data privacy activist requiring the DPC of Ireland to suspend data transfers by Facebook Ireland to Facebook Inc. (USA) due to the concern that his personal data would get accessed by U.S. intelligence authorities under their national security laws (revealed by Edward Snowden) and thereby violating his rights. However, the Irish DPC refused to investigate, stating the existence of adequate protection under the Safe Harbor framework signed between the US and EU. The Court of Justice of the European Union in 2015 ruled that the European Commission’s adequacy determination for the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework was invalid.

This led to the creation of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield arrangement (US organizations are required to self-certify and publicly commit to complying with its requirements, although it’s completely voluntary). In a separate case, often referred to as “Schrems 2”, the CJEU invalidated the European Commission’s adequacy determination for Privacy Shield after Mr. Scherms further complained of Facebook Ireland to the Irish Data Protection Commissioner.

GDPR data breach fines & penalties

The GDPR allows the data protection authorities of the EU to levy fines up to the tune of euro 20 million or 4% of the global annual turnover (whichever is higher) to companies who fail to comply with the guidelines listed under the GDPR legislation. Since its inception in 2018, the data protection authorities across the EU have been on an enforcement rampage. In 2021, the GDPR fines have risen by 40% from last year, penalties have aggregated to around euro 158 million and 121,000 data breaches have been recorded. Some of the biggest fines are:

Google (Euro 50 million) – This is the biggest fine levied to date by a DPA (in this case the French DPA), for violation of users consent policies and for not granting them more control over how their personal data is processed.

H&M (Euro 35 million) – The Hamburg DPA imposed the second-largest fine on clothing retailers for violations of the principle of data minimization when they processed sensitive data about their own employees’ health, religious beliefs and did a detailed profiling to evaluate their performance and take decisions on their employment matters.

British Airways (Euro 22 million) – The fine was imposed when the company’s system was breached and it affected approx. 400,00 customers when their personal data like login details, card details and name and address got leaked. British Airways didn’t maintain basic security measures in place to prevent the breach.

More recently Amazon is looking at a Euro 300 million fine for GDPR breaches which will dwarf any other fines levied to date. The fine has been proposed by the Luxembourg DPA for the collection and use of personal data for marketing purposes.

Conclusion

Your personal data is power, and it is for sale. Targeted information jeopardizes an individual’s privilege to make informed decisions, however, with data privacy protection regulations like GDPR gaining prominence, companies should tread cautiously and limit the processing of personal data to, only when necessary, and to the absolute minimum, to meet the purpose.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

By

Diganth Raj Sehgal

-

October 7, 2021

0

This article is written by Ridhi Mittal, a student of Symbiosis Law School, Noida. This article talks about the United Nations Agenda of 2030, and what all was talked about and decided through this Agenda.

Introduction

The United Nations is an organization to maintain global peace and security and develop friendly relations among nations, international cooperation, promoting social progress, establishing better living standards, and exercising human rights. It helps the nations to work together and improve the lives of poor people and provide as many people as possible with basic amenities namely food, shelter, clothing, education, and health facilities. When we talk about the UN Agenda, we are broadly talking about a plan of action for the betterment of the people, the planet and prosperity. It looks up to strengthening universal peace in attaining greater freedom. The greatest global change, recognised by the people, is poverty. Eradicating poverty in all forms and dimensions can be done through sustainable development.

Call for action to change our world

After World War II, nearly 70 years ago, the United Nations was established by the states to ensure peace and international cooperation. This organization is looked upon to resolve inter-state disputes between different countries and build a future that is good for all. It was thought that if the 2030 Agenda becomes successful, poverty might be eradicated as the current generation has the power to save the planet. Through this Agenda, the plan to save the planet in the next 15 years has been announced. The new goals, mentioned by the UN 2030 Agenda, allow the people of the world to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world. “We the people” mentioned in the Charter of the United Nations, will embark on the journey to the 2030 Agenda. It involves the Parliament, Government, and other international institutions as well as the local authorities. Humanity’s future lies in the hands of the people, that is, the younger generation, who are the torch bearers of the future. The road to sustainable development is being mapped and now it is the people on the planet who have to make the journey a successful one.

Sustainable development goals as per the 2030 Agenda

To achieve the long-term goal of sustainable development, the United Nations has divided the aim into seventeen short-term goals. These seventeen short term goals are listed below:

Poverty

The first goal is to eliminate poverty. The mission statement for the same is, “End poverty in all its forms everywhere.” Poverty is something that can go up to many extents like unemployment, social exclusion, diseases, and vulnerability of a certain population. Even if the economy of a country rises but the growth is unequal among different sections of society, it results in social cohesion, increase in political tensions, instability, and conflicts. It is an understandable fact that large family sizes and poverty go hand in hand. A high fertility rate traps a country in poverty. For the same reason, the World Bank has warned that poverty will not decrease in 2021. This Agenda is about reaching out to everyone, no matter how further and deprived they are, and ensuring that no one is left behind.

Hunger

The second goal is to erase hunger. The mission statement says, “Universal access to safe and nutritious food.” This aims at ending hunger and ensuring access to food and nutrition by all people around the globe, throughout the year. The calorie requirement, given by the World Resource Institute, of the population as a whole is 10 billion, is 56 percent more than the current total crop production. To accomplish this target, the United Nations has come up with creating sustainable food systems, which means providing security of food and nutrition to everyone in a manner that does not compromise the economic, social, and environmental bases to generate food security and nutrition for future generations. Secondly, small-scale producers also hold the power to bring change in this field. Ending rural poverty will help them increase their incomes and improve their well-being. Another significant way to promote zero hunger is minimizing food loss. Food can be produced according to the consumer’s or retailer’s choice. In addition to this, malnutrition is an outcome of poverty and hunger. Stunting refers to the impaired growth and development that a child faces due to improper nutrition. Ensuring access to food with proper nutritional value at the start of pregnancy, till the child’s second birthday is a measure by The United Nations to avoid stunting.

Health

Establishing good health and well-being is the third goal for achieving SDG 2030. A very high proportion of the total population becomes the prey of diseases due to lack of awareness and unavailability of resources. The public healthcare sectors which are already overburdened fail to provide effective and efficient health services to people. For instance, lack of access to modern contraception and medically safe abortions lead to unwanted pregnancies and preventable maternal deaths. The rate of women dying due to pregnancy complications is very high. So, investing in healthcare and spreading awareness about the same, including access to family planning, helps control the problem of overpopulation and bring improvement in the lives of people. Moreover, the United Nations monitors factors like air quality and traffic. It aspired for well-being for all and has committed to ending the epidemics of AIDS, malaria, and other communicable diseases by 2030.

Education

Further pursuing the objective of sustainable development, the UN, in the 2030 Agenda, has included a good quality education for everyone and it also promotes the concept of lifelong learning. Greater investment in quality education programs is the key to alleviate poverty. Mainly, sustainable education encompasses all school subjects to extend far beyond the classroom like knowledge about real-world skills which can contribute towards improving the planet. The motto is to provide children with the self-sufficiency they need for tomorrow. Worldwide, over a hundred million youth lack basic literacy skills, and most of them are females. It is UNESCO who is responsible for coordinating with the international community to achieve this goal through partnerships, policy guidance, capacity development, monitoring, and advocacy.

Gender equality

Gender equality by 2030 requires actions to eliminate the root causes of discrimination. According to the observations by the authorities, the commitment has brought improvements in a few areas but all the legal, social, economic barriers to the empowerment of the victims, including digital empowerment are still desirable.

Hygiene

The sixth goal of SDG UN 2030 is improving clean water and sanitization. The goals address water scarcity, poor water quality, and inadequate sanitation. 2.2 billion people around the world lack safe drinking water and 4.2 billion lack sanitation services. Water and sanitation-related diseases are amongst the major causes of death in children under the age of five. At present, the count of children dying from diarrhoeal diseases linked to poor hygiene is more than 800 children each day. By managing these aspects, we will also be able to manage the production of food and energy and contribute to economic growth.

Energy

Growing affordable and clean energy is the next goal. This involves investing in energy sources such as solar, wind, and thermal as they are clean. Global energy demand is expected to be increased by 50 percent in the next 30 years which will be the result of population growth and economic development. Expanding infrastructure and upgrading technology to provide clean and more efficient energy in all countries is a way to encourage growth and development which will also be helping the environment. High-income countries shall lead the way in transitioning to clean fuels and also in order to support the low-income countries to do the same. The number of people relying on polluting fuels and technology is great in number, reaching an estimate of 3 billion people.

Economic Growth

To carry out the SDG 2030 goal further, the UN has come up with the idea of creating decent work and economic growth. Here, the main focus is to support development-oriented policies, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity, and innovation. They also encourage the formalization and growth of micro, small, and medium-scale organizations. It reaffirms the relationship between economic and social policies and their significance in support of full employment and decent work. This goal is significant as a large number of dependable youth makes it impossible for the economy to rise. To ensure decent work, the UN will be taking effective measures to remove unwanted or forced labour and abolish child labour completely.

Infrastructure

Goal 9 targets increasing industry, innovation, and infrastructure. This seeks to build a strong infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and foster innovation which could uplift the economy, creating job opportunities and eventually leading to demolishing poverty. Similar to SDG 8, this goal encourages start-up culture as well in developing countries. Up-gradation in these three areas will also increase resource-usage efficiency.

Inequality reduction

The tenth goal is reducing inequality within and among countries. Inequality among countries due to various reasons is a persistent cause of concern. Even though there have been some positive signs for the same, yet in some dimensions like relative income and trade status, it still prevails. It is also deepening in countries with vulnerable populations, weaker health systems, and humanitarian crises. Senior citizens disabled, special people, indigenous people, refugees, and migrants are at the highest risk of being left behind. Resources being distributed among people equitably are very essential for reaching the aim of sustainable development

Planned cities

The further goal is to mobilize sustainable cities and communities. SDG 11 aims to renew and plan cities and other human settlements so that it offers opportunities to everyone along with necessities. Urban communities have more than half the world’s population living in them, which is expected to rise to 68 percent by 2050. This can lead to outstripping of clean water, sanitation, health, jobs, and education that can be offered. The main target of the particular goal is to invest in public transport, creating green public spaces, improving urban planning and management.

Consumption

Goal 12 of SDG 2030 ensures responsible and sustainable production and consumption. Climate change is led by greenhouse emissions which are further seen due to the inefficient human consumption of food, energy, and other goods and services. Each year an estimate of one-third of the total food produced, which is about 1.3 billion tonnes worth around $1 trillion, ends up rotting and gets wasted due to poor transportation and harvesting practices. Also, switching to energy-efficient light bulbs from the other ordinary ones would save a lot of money annually in the world. Sustainable consumption and production are about doing more and better with less, decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation, increasing resource efficiency, and promoting sustainable lifestyles. It can also contribute towards poverty alleviation and transition towards low carbon and green economy. Consumption can be reduced in three primary ways:

Shifting from higher-emitting to lower-emitting items in terms of basket of goods and services consumed.
Reducing the overall rate of economic growth
Reducing the rate of population growth.

Climatic actions

The official thirteenth goal of SDG 2030 talks about taking urgent action in order to combat climate change and its impact. Five critical climate actions that can be taken are:

Reduce wastage of food- As mentioned above in goal 12, one-third of the food we cultivate ends up in the garbage. To think about water, capital, labor, and land along with the greenhouse gases contributed towards the production is a lot of wastage.
Educate girls- Women empowerment leads to better incomes and independence. Maternal and infant mortality rate is low among educated women, and so is the incidence of HIV/AIDS. It will also help women respond better to climate shocks.
Eat a plant-rich diet- According to the project Drawdown, if there was a whole nation of cattle, it would be the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases.
Conserve tropical forests- The Rainforest Alliance has worked to protect existing forests and restore degraded and deforested land. The goal is to train farmers around the world in climate-smart and sustainable methods.

Water bodies

Developing life below water is a very significant objective. The conservation and sustainable use of oceans, seas, and marine resources play a huge role in sustainable development. Healthy water bodies are essential for our existence. We must protect them by taking certain measures like eliminating water pollution, reducing the amount of excess fishing and also managing and protecting the life existing in marine bodies with immediate effect in the world. Human activities have damaged two-third of the marine areas and also lead reef corals to extinction. A third of sharks and rays are also endangered by the existing human activities.

Land

The fifteenth goal of SDG 2030 is life on land. Human population growth is one of the main causes of biodiversity loss. We have lost about 60 percent of all vertebrate wildlife populations since 1970. The mission statement is, “Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.” The 2019 UN assessment of the landmark stated, “Changes to the direct drivers of natural deterioration cannot be achieved without transformative change that simultaneously addresses the indirect drivers.”

Partnership

Overall, cross-sectoral partnerships that recognize the crucial links between social and environmental issues are the key to a better future. Partnership for the goals is very important to make this Agenda come true. Without unity, it will not be possible. The international community must foster recognition of the urgent need to end human population growth as soon as it is ethically possible and promote greater investment in powering solutions. It is said that all countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. This plan is for taking the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world on to a sustainable and resilient path.

Means of implementation

A strong commitment to the implementation of the above-stated goals is to be ensured. Global Partnership is very essential to successfully implement the Sustainable Development Goals. It is because the Global Partnership will facilitate the intensive global engagement for supporting the implementation of the goals. It brings together the Government, citizens of the world, including the public and private sectors. The implementation of each and every one of the 17 goals given by the UN Agenda is equally important for a society or a nation to grow in a true and real sense and not just in one aspect. Every goal shall be given equal priority and importance to ensure a successful journey. The Addis Ababa Action Agenda supports, complements, and helps to contextualize the 2030 Agenda’s means of implementation targets. The domestic public resources and domestic and international private business are also included in the same. The finance, international development cooperation, international trade which is used as the engine for development, debt and debt sustainability, addressing systemic issues and science, technology, innovation and capacity-building, and data, monitoring, and follow-up is also included. Middle-income countries face significant challenges to achieve sustainable development. It is central to our common pursuit in terms of sustainable development which also includes achievement of the sustainable development goals and an effective use of domestic resources. All the countries and their public policies are underscored by the principle of national ownership. Economic growth is the reason and source for the generation of domestic resources which is further supported by an enabling environment at all levels. The sustainable development goals and targets, also including the means of implementation are universal, interlinked and indivisible.

Follow-up and review

A review system for the correct implementation of the Agenda will be maintained for the next 15 years. A vital contribution to implementation will be a voluntary, effective, transparent, integrated and participatory follow-up and review system. This will help the countries in maximising and tracking progress of the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda in order to ensure that no one is left behind. Accountability will be promoted amongst the citizens because it is operational at the national, regional, and global levels. It will ensure effective international cooperation in achieving the Agenda and will also support mutual learning. A course of mutual trust and understanding is of the top-most priority as this will be a universal Agenda. Certain principles are there that will guide the middle-income groups in follow-up and review processes at all levels. These principles are listed below:

These principles are voluntary for each country to follow and do not mandate any particular country. Different national realities, capacities and levels of development are taken into account. It respects the policies and priorities of each country. For achieving sustainable development, national ownership is the key, the foundation for reviews at regional as well as global levels will be from the outcome of national level processes. National official data sources will be the primary basis of the global review.
Through the principles, the progress of implementation of the universal goals and targets will be tracked. It will also include the means of implementation in all countries in a way that respects their universal, integrated, as well as interrelated nature and also the three dimensions of sustainable development.
A long-term orientation, identifying middle-income achievements Middle-income, challenges, gaps, and critical success factors, and supporting countries in making informed policy choices will be maintained. The mobilization of the necessary means of implementation and partnerships will be supported by them. Also, the identification of solutions and practices in order to promote the coordination and effectiveness of the international development system will be supported as well.
These principles and goals will be open, inclusive, participatory, and transparent for everyone and all relevant stakeholders will support reporting.
They will be open to all and inclusive, participatory, and transparent for all the people and will also support reporting by all relevant stakeholders.
They will be seen as people-centred, gender-sensitive, in respect of human rights, and have a particular focus on the poorest, most vulnerable, and those furthest behind.
It is said that these principles will build on existing platforms and processes and avoid any kind of duplication. They will also respond to the national circumstances, capacities, needs, and priorities. They will also evolve and take into account the emerging issues and the development of new methodologies, and will minimize the reporting burden on national administrations.
They will be based on evidence. Informed by the country-led evaluations and data, which is high-quality, accessible, timely, reliable, and disaggregated by income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migration status, disability, and geographic location, and all the other characteristics that are relevant in the national contexts.
A need for enhanced capacity-building support for developing countries, including the strengthening of national data systems and evaluation programs, particularly in African countries, least developed countries, small island developing States, landlocked developing countries, and middle-income countries, is required.
The active support of the United Nations system and other multilateral institutions will provide the benefit these principles need.

Global indicators will be used to keep a follow-up and review system on the following goals and targets. Regional and national level indicators, developed by the member states, will complement them in addition to the outcomes of the work that is undertaken for the baselines developments for those targets where national and global baseline data does not yet exist. Participation in follow-up and review processes will be supported by the high level political forums. These processes are by the major groups and other relevant stakeholders. The importance of system-wide strategic planning, implementation, and reporting to ensure coherent and integrated support to the implementation of the new Agenda by the United Nations development system is also stressed upon.

India’s role in attaining SDG 2030

The 2030 Agenda is an Agenda that shall be followed by every country on the planet as it aims towards the betterment of the society. India has also been one of the countries to take initiatives for matching up with the Sustainable Development Goals in the world. Some of those measures or initiatives are listed as followed:

On state-wise reports, Jharkhand and Bihar are among the least possible states to meet the 2030 Agenda goals. Overall India is taking initiatives in completing the 2030 Agenda.

Conclusions

The Agenda to transform our world into a better place can only be achieved if all the nations work together ethically and empower the population policy which is the root of all problems including poverty, unequal distribution of resources, hunger, and many more. Agenda offers increased opportunities to advance youth which can only be possible by sustainable development. The SDGs provide councils with a framework for strategic planning, policy review, and action for economic growth, social justice and inclusion, protection of climate, environment, and biodiversity, and ensuring no one is left behind. Over the next 15 years, the goals and targets will stimulate action in the areas that require importance in terms of humanity and the planet.

References

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.