On Saturday, a non-governmental organization, the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR), joined the Supreme Court’s choir overseeing the investigation of the Pegasus dispute, expressing concern that the alleged surveillance operations might involve attempts to blackmail judges.
“Phone tapping through Pegasus may be an attempt to collect personal information from the judge without their knowledge, or, like Bhima Koregaon’s activists and lawyers, an attempt to embed compromise information in the judge’s phone, no matter where it is A CJAR said that they could have tried to blackmail these judges.
The NGO stated: “This is an attack on judicial independence and requires the Supreme Court to respond to understand the truth of the matter and resolve public concerns about these illegal attempts to compromise their independence.”
“Since the Union Government continues to confuse this issue in the public domain, does not allow debate in parliament and is not interested in investigating the criminal activities described in the disclosure of the NSO Group (Israeli company that owns Pegasus spyware), We believe in court The agency will help determine the facts and hold accountable for the illegal phone tapping, “added CJAR.
To deal with matters related to legal and constitutional failures, the non-governmental organizations whose patrons include former judges and superior lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court, requesting the following steps:
# Establish a special survey team of independent reliable researchers led by the Judge of the Supreme Court withdrawn, and consult about the complaints of piracy of mobile phones.
#The telephone number of the Judge of the Supreme Court approved the use of an employee (and her family) who demanded sexual harassment in the great proof of India, Ranjan Gogoi.
#Justice Ranjan Gogoi and ask if there is inappropriate inappropriate between the request for qualified sexual harassment.
#Report public reports A.K. The Patnaik Committee saw the claim of “conspiracy” in relation to sexual harassment for Justice Gogoi.
The NGO expressed its deep concerns about Pegasus hacking the mobile phones of the citizens of India.
“Such intrusive monitoring of the personal phones of political leaders, journalists, and activists is a flagrant violation of the privacy rights upheld by the Supreme Court and an insult to civil liberties. The Pegasus software was inserted into some target mobile phones. It has been confirmed through the network forensics of some of these phones… He said that this was done at the request of the Indian government, which can be seen from the fact that NSO only sells the software to “reviewed governments”
When referring to allegations that the phone numbers of current Supreme Court judges and female relatives of Supreme Court staff may be targets of piracy, the NGO said:
“These allegations are made by respected media organizations based on “Such intrusive monitoring of the personal phones of political leaders, journalists, and activists is a flagrant violation of the privacy rights upheld by the Supreme Court and an insult to civil liberties. The Pegasus software was inserted into some target mobile phones. It has been confirmed through the network forensics of some of these phones… He said that this was done at the request of the Indian government, which can be seen from the fact that NSO only sells the software to “reviewed governments”
When referring to allegations that the phone numbers of current Supreme Court judges and female relatives of Supreme Court staff may be targets of piracy, the NGO said:
“These allegations are made by respected media organizations based on worldwide cooperative investigation efforts. CJAR takes the most serious attitude, not only because these actions are patented illegally, but also because the independence of the judiciary they represent may be threatened.”
CJAR added: “Although the phone is hacked, the current Supreme Court judge’s name has not yet been made public, but according to reports from the central government, the fact that the phone belonging to the judge was hacked is itself serious enough to warrant investigation and attribution of responsibility. “
CJAR takes the most serious attitude, not only because these actions are patented illegally, but also because the independence of the judiciary they represent may be threatened.”
