Representative image of a surveillance camera with the India flag.
Credit: iStock Photo
One wonders why State actors engaging in the surveillance of citizens do not learn from their past misadventures. After the Pegasus fiasco, now Apple has warned about two dozen iPhone users in India: ‘Apple believes you are being targeted by state-sponsored attackers who are trying to remotely compromise the iPhone associated with your Apple ID.’ Such warnings have been issued sporadically by Apple in 150 countries after an alert function was incorporated in its phones in 2021.
Despite attempts on social media to ascribe the Apple alert to an ‘algorithm malfunction’ triggering these alerts (since denied by Apple), the needle of suspicion points towards State actors. Moreover, the attempts were targeted, says Apple, and were not large-scale harvesting of data as private and individual hackers tend to do. All recipients of the alert are known critics of the government, from Opposition leaders to journalists. Some of them were also targeted using the Pegasus spyware in 2021. Apple had sued Pegasus’ parent company of NSO Group in the US ‘to curb the abuse of state-sponsored spyware’.
India reportedly started looking for alternative spyware after the US-based Amazon.com’s cloud services shut down the infrastructure of the NSO Group. The Financial Times reported in March that India was in the market with an estimated budget of $120 million for buying alternatives to Pegasus like Quadream and Cognyte (both made by Israeli firms) and Predator sold by Greek firm Intellexa, which had employed Israeli military veterans to create the spyware. In April, the Congress claimed that the Union government was buying Cognyte spyware to snoop on politicians, media, activists, and NGOs. Expectedly there is no information in the public domain about any new purchases of spyware programmes by India.
After the allegations and negative publicity faced by the government in the Pegasus spyware controversy, the government denied any involvement. However, suspicions about its role were fuelled by its refusal to co-operate with the Supreme Court when it sought to investigate who had purchased the Pegasus software. Ostensibly, Pegasus was sold only to governments and their agencies. As on the previous occasion, the government has again ordered a ‘detailed investigation’ into the Apple alerts as it ‘takes its role of protecting privacy and security of all citizens very seriously’.
If indeed the government is behind the targeted attempts at information-gathering, then it must feel that adequate intelligence is not readily available to it. It suggests that the ruling dispensation may have surrounded itself in such an echo chamber and may be so feared that it might have lost touch with ground reality, and does not know what its critics are thinking or planning. There are clear indications of late that this may increasingly be the case, especially in the regime’s second coming.
Consider how the NewsClick raids in early October, became essentially a trawling operation for gathering information. Over 250 electronic devices including laptops, computer hard disks, mobile phones, and even passports were seized by the Special Cell of Delhi Police. Over 90 journalists and civil society activists were interrogated, and their homes were searched. Even the Delhi Police would have known that if NewsClick was involved in money laundering, it would need to be discreet rather than sharing the information with people who could fill an entire police station.
Someone clearly wanted to gather information about the contacts, text messages, WhatsApp records, documents, reading lists, archival material, field notes, and articles both written and planned that were likely to be on the seized electronic devices. The operation was not to blunt the work of journalists critical of the government — because journalists tend to bounce back — from all indications it was an intelligence-gathering operation.
Another government decision can be seen as geared to gathering ground intelligence. On October 18, the Centre issued an order appointing civil servants of the rank of Joint Secretary/Director/Deputy Secretary as ‘Rath Prabharis (Special Officers)’. There would be one officer each for the 765 districts of the country covering 269,000 village panchayats for the ‘Viksit Bharat Sankalp Yatra’ taking place from November 20 to January 25.
Ostensibly they would be ‘disseminating information, awareness and extending services at gram panchayat level.’ The Election Commission of India (ECI) has ruled that these activities, in view of the ongoing state elections, should not be undertaken in the constituencies where the Model Code of Conduct is in force till December 5. Facing criticism, the ‘Rath Prabharis’ have been renamed as ‘nodal officers’ by the information and broadcasting ministry.
While the Opposition has described the move as using government officers for ‘political propaganda’, the government has defended it as an attempt to ensure ‘full saturation’ of its welfare schemes. Whether they are successful in spreading ‘political propaganda’ or not, the ‘nodal officers’ will certainly be able to gather intelligence by getting ground feedback about the efficacy, reach, and peoples’ response to the government’s welfare schemes. It may be an admission that the government has lost touch with voters and wants to reconnect with them virtually on the eve of the 2024 general elections.
Normally, such intelligence should have come as feedback from party workers, officer bearers, and elected representatives. Could it be that the central leadership of the government has so isolated itself that even party workers are afraid of speaking truth to power? Only the abusive brigade with no mass base stands vociferously with the national leadership, the others seem to have chosen to keep quiet.
If government officials and the grassroots leadership of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are exercising self-restraint for fear of retribution, ground intelligence will not filter up through political and administrative channels, and the need for intrusive surveillance will only grow.
(Bharat Bhushan is a Delhi-based journalist.)
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.