Context:
Originally conceived after the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) has become operational and is being increasingly used by States. Its integration with the National Population Register (NPR) has sparked concerns regarding mass surveillance, lack of statutory safeguards, and algorithmic policing risks.
Key Highlights:
- Institutional Background
- Approved in 2012 via executive order
- Designed as a middleware platform
- Integrates data from 21 categories of databases
- Accessible to 11 central agencies
- Operational Expansion
- Around 45,000 requests processed monthly
- Access being extended to lower-ranked police officials
- States directed (Nov 2025) to increase usage
- Integration with NPR
- NPR contains data of 1.19 billion residents
- Integration shifts focus from event-based tracking to population-scale mapping
- Analytical Layer – Gandiva
- Entity-resolution engine
- Links fragmented data across:
- Identity records
- Travel logs
- Financial transactions
- Telecom metadata
- Raises concerns of algorithmic bias
- Core Concerns
- Absence of a statutory framework
- No independent oversight mechanism
- Risk of biased algorithmic policing
- Potential misuse despite access logs
Relevant Prelims Points:
- NATGRID:
- Intelligence-sharing platform integrating databases
- Established via executive decision (not legislation)
- National Population Register (NPR):
- Register of usual residents
- Contains demographic details
- Linked to citizenship debates
- Algorithmic Bias:
- Systematic discrimination arising from flawed datasets or design
- May reflect societal prejudices (e.g., caste, religion)
- Mass Surveillance:
- Large-scale monitoring of population data
- Raises Article 21 (Right to Privacy) concerns
- Right to Privacy:
- Recognized as a Fundamental Right (Puttaswamy Judgment, 2017)
Relevant Mains Points:
- National Security vs Civil Liberties
- NATGRID strengthens:
- Intelligence coordination
- Counter-terrorism capabilities
- However, risks:
- Surveillance overreach
- Chilling effect on freedoms
- Constitutional and Legal Concerns
- Absence of:
- Parliamentary statute
- Judicial oversight
- Raises questions under:
- Article 14 (Equality)
- Article 21 (Privacy & Due Process)
- Algorithmic Governance and Ethics
- Use of Gandiva analytics
- Risks:
- Profiling of marginalized communities
- Reinforcement of systemic biases
- Ethical concerns in predictive policing
- Institutional Weakness Argument
- Intelligence failures may stem from:
- Poor coordination
- Accountability gaps
- Not merely lack of data
- Internal Security Implications
- Enhances counter-terror framework
- But requires:
- Checks and balances
- Proportionality principle
Way Forward:
- Enact a comprehensive statutory framework
- Establish independent oversight authority
- Mandate algorithmic audits for bias
- Ensure compliance with Data Protection laws
- Maintain balance between:
- Security imperatives
- Democratic accountability
UPSC Relevance:
GS 2 – Polity (Privacy, Governance, Accountability)
GS 3 – Internal Security (Intelligence Reforms)
GS 4 – Ethics (Algorithmic Bias, State Power and Responsibility)