Digital Personal Data Protection Act and Disability Rights

February 28, 2025

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) is a very important piece of legislation in India. It aims to regulate the processing of digital personal data while balancing individual rights and lawful data processing needs. Recently, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has been consulting the public on the draft rules associated with this Act. Disability rights activists have raised concerns regarding a specific provision that they believe undermines the autonomy of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs).

Key Provisions of the DPDP Act

The DPDP Act mandates that data fiduciaries must obtain verifiable consent from the guardian of any child or adult PwD before processing their personal data.
This is outlined in Section 9(1) of the Act. The Act defines data fiduciaries as those processing personal data, while data principals are the individuals whose data is being collected.

Concerns of Disability Rights Activists

Activists argue that Section 9(1) infantilises PwDs. It assumes that having a legal guardian equates to an inability to make decisions, which contradicts the principles of self-determination. They contend that this provision could restrict PwDs’ access to digital platforms, thereby infringing on their rights.

The Role of Guardians in Disability Rights

Legal guardianship for PwDs is governed by two primary laws – the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPWD Act) and the National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation, and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 (NT Act). The RPWD Act allows for limited guardianship, supporting PwDs in specific legal decisions, while the NT Act provides for full guardianship. This difference creates confusion about the roles and responsibilities of guardians.

Implementation Challenges

The draft rules under the DPDP Act attempt to clarify how consent should be obtained from guardians. However, the lack of illustrative examples for PwDs raises doubts about practical implementation. Activists stress the need for clear guidelines to ensure that guardianship does not compromise the autonomy of PwDs.

Intersectionality and Digital Rights

Concerns about intersectionality arise when considering factors like gender and disability. For instance, a PwD woman may require a guardian’s consent to purchase sanitary products online. This limitation can hinder access to essential services, raising questions about the adequacy of the DPDP Act in protecting the rights of all PwDs.

Data Privacy and Legal Responsibilities

Activists worry about the legal obligations placed on guardians regarding consent for data processing. Questions arise about the implications of guardianship on data privacy and the potential for conflicts of interest. If guardians act in their own interests, it could undermine the rights of the PwD they represent.

Accessibility of Digital Platforms

Despite the legal frameworks established, accessibility remains barrier for PwDs. A recent evaluation revealed that many popular digital platforms lack adequate accessibility features. This issue complicates the implementation of the DPDP Act, as inaccessible platforms can prevent PwDs from exercising their rights.

« Previous Post Next Post »