Kashmiris are often detained without warrant or official sanction for the detention. In many cases, after detention they are subjected to unauthorised screening of their phones. This is done by Indian security officers to see the images or social media accounts of the detained person. If they find any material that may be politically unsavoury or critical of the BJP government, images of Pakistani flags, or content on their social media accounts that is not in line with the state narrative on Kashmir, the person may face physical abuse or further detention. There have been cases of people with Burhan Wani’s photo in their photo gallery being beaten up,” said Mirza Saaib Beg, a lawyer belonging to Indian-occupied Kashmir.

According to Beg, Kashmiri documentary filmmakers, who obtained permissions for filmmaking, have been made to delete footage that included Indian soldiers.

“Recently, there were reports of airport officials going through the phones of Kashmiri travellers to see if they had the “red dot” profile picture on their Facebook accounts,” he said. “If they found it, the person would be subjected to extra security checks.”

Beg added that people writing about or commenting online about the violation of their fundamental rights by the government of India have been targeted by their employers.

According to Indian narrative, Kashmir is an ‘integral part’ of the country. While Jammu & Kashmir has remained restive ever since the territory became disputed, a recent spike in tensions was witnessed in the region after India revoked Articles 370 and 35(A) via a presidential decree and stripped Jammu-Kashmir of special status. Then, India sent thousands of additional troops, imposed a curfew, arrested political leaders and shut down telecommunications and internet in the region it occupies. The internet shutdown has been condemned by Human Rights Watch and feminist organisations. Pakistan has also blocked internet service in the part of Kashmir that it administers.

When the pro-independence Jammu-Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) decided to exercise their democratic right to free movement by crossing the ceasefire line, the Indian state termed their protest a conspiratorial, terrorist attack.

The Kashmiri lawyer’s account illustrates how the citizen’s right to privacy stands subordinated to the ‘national interest’ of modern nation-states, especially ambitious regional powers as India. In the epoch of neoliberal imperialism, nation-states have adopted an even more reactionary character in light of increasingly narrow nationalism.

In the name of “national interest”, democratic rights’ violations are justified in nearly all parts of the world. Nation-states like to term it “national interest” to give it a collective character and have the citizenry believe that there is a common, shared interest. But when wars are initiated in the name of this ‘national interest’, the economic, political and social interests of the ruling classes often remain intact while low-ranking soldiers and common civilians, including men, women and children lose their lives. Furthermore, nation-states need to keep alive the threat of an enemy to keep their war economy running.

This ideology, to sustain itself, has to also be perpetuated in the citizenry. When the pro-independence Jammu-Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) decided to exercise their democratic right to free movement by crossing the ceasefire line, the Indian state termed their protest a conspiratorial, terrorist attack. This allowed the average Indian to believe that their life is threatened and thus join in to uphold the state’s nationalist narrative.

Will the independence of Kashmir threaten the lives of Indians? The likelihood of peace and stability in the region is higher as the right to self-determination would be a resolution to the long-standing conflict. The only thing that the independence of Kashmir would threaten is the interests of those few who not only require a constant conflict to retain their seats, but have an actual economic interest in maintaining their dominance in the region.

A recent study found that India is one of the top three surveillance states – the other two being Russia and China. In 2019, Jammu-Kashmir witnessed internet shutdowns 55 times. Amidst the ongoing internet shutdown, the Indian government has provided an internet connection at a media centre but reporters have complained about lack of privacy and the facility being under surveillance. The world continues with its inaction as these violations of citizens’ privacy continue unabated.

During the post-war revolutionary waves, democratic rights were won in many imperialist centres as a result of workers-led mass movements. These victories led to the ‘welfare state’ framework with the state providing healthcare, education and other social securities. These democratic rights could not be won on a similar scale in many semi-colonial nation-states due to, amongst other factors, their subordinate location in the imperialist hierarchy, with their patterns of capitalist accumulation dependent on more powerful imperialist nations.

After the 1970s-1980s, neoliberalism began to threaten hard-won democratic rights to free healthcare, reproductive rights, etc., in western nation-states. The neoliberal wave had far more severe repercussions on the semi-colonies as very few democratic rights as well as independent working-class organisations to defend these rights existed in the first place. This allowed many of these so-called Third World states to adopt an increasingly authoritarian character.

This authoritarian character reflects in the digital sphere, too, with modern nation-states developing all the more surveillance technologies to pry on the people they govern. Meanwhile, imperialist nation-states like China and Russia are not behind with their attacks on democratic freedoms while the US with its digital surveillance tactics is also having its fair share of authoritarianism.

It is important to look at the various ways in which the right to privacy is violated. At the same time, it is particularly crucial to place these violations in the context that they occur in. Would India be infringing on the privacy of Kashmiris if it did not have colonial/expansionist designs for Kashmir? Does the JKLF protest for the right to free movement within Kashmir really threaten the life of the average Indian? What tools are used by the Indian state to make the average Indian think about pro-independence rallies in Kashmir as a conspiratorial, terrorist attack? What is the general situation of democratic rights for Kashmiris? In what ways is the Indian state violating the right to privacy of the Kashmiris? These are all questions that require answers for us to be able to situate the crisis of data privacy in Kashmir.

The writer is the research associate at Digital Rights Foundation. She holds an MA in Gender & Sexuality-Distinction from SOAS University of London and an MA in Mass Communication from Karachi University.