Right to Privacy Under Siege in IIoJK and India: A Controlled Digital Existence

Right to Privacy Under Siege in IIoJK and India:
A Controlled Digital Existence

What does privacy mean when every phone, every movement and every message can be checked at a checkpoint? In Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, the idea of privacy is no longer stable. It has been reshaped by surveillance systems, legal instruments and digital monitoring that reach into both public and private life. The right to privacy is protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and reinforced by the Supreme Court judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017). It is also embedded in international law under Article 12 of the Universal, Declaration of Human Rights. Yet, in practice, these

guarantees face continuous pressure in Kashmir.

A 2026 Tech Policy Press report described Kashmir as a “high-surveillance zone.” CCTV networks, biometric systems, telecom interception and checkpoint-based digital screening now shape everyday life.

Have you ever been asked to unlock your phone and share

your password at a checkpoint?

Reports from Poonch and South Kashmir confirm this practice. Mobile phones are routinely checked during cordon and search operations. Call logs and messages linked to contacts across the Line of Control are sometimes treated as grounds for detention. Families now avoid contact across borders out of fear that communication itself may become evidence.

In May 2026, authorities fitted a GPS-enabled tracking anklet on a bail-released Kashmiri resident, allowing continuous monitoring of his movement. This marks a shift from observation to real-time control of individual mobility. At the same time, surveillance is no longer limited to physical space. Journalists in Kashmir report forced phone unlocks at checkpoints. One journalist, speaking under anonymity, described it simply: “Privacy does not exist.” Another journalist, Majid Hyderi, faced intimidation after ling complaints and had to seek safety inside a courtroom.

Privacy concerns also extend beyond the region. In May 2025, Kashmiri students at Delhi University were asked to submit Aadhaar numbers and full residential addresses, including floor details, through an unofficial WhatsApp group. Students described it as unsafe and discriminatory. One student asked a direct question: why only Kashmiris?This incident highlights how identity-based data collection creates fear of profiling. Even when framed as administrative procedure, the method of collection raises concerns about exposure and misuse of personal data.

It also connects to a wider digital vulnerability. A cybersecurity breach reported by US-based Resecurity exposed data of nearly 81.5 crore Indians, including Aadhaar-linked information. For communities already under scrutiny, such breaches intensify the risk of identity exposure. Monitoring does not stop at individuals. It extends into religious and community spaces. Reports from 2025–2026

indicate that mosques and religious gatherings are also under observation. Digital surveillance tools and intelligence monitoring have expanded into areas traditionally protected as private or sacred.

At the same time, social media activity is increasingly regulated under laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Posts critical of authorities can trigger questioning or legal action.Legal and technological systems now operate together. Digital ID systems like Aadhaar, telecom tracking frameworks and biometric databases have created a united identity architecture. In theory, these systems serve governance. In practice, they also enable granular tracking

of individuals.

When privacy weakens, fear enters everyday life. People begin to self-censor messages. Students hesitate before sharing addresses. Journalists avoid sensitive reporting. Families limit communication. This is not only about surveillance tools. It is about behavior shaped by the possibility of being watched. So the question becomes unavoidable: Can freedom exist where every digital trace is monitored? In Kashmir today, privacy is no longer just a legal concept. It is a lived uncertainty.

Facebook Twitter