The event Balancing Privacy and Agency under the DPDPA was held on 10 February 2025 at The Dome, Ambassador Hotel, New Delhi. Organized by The Quantum Hub in collaboration with the Nipman Foundation, Youth Ki Awaaz, and Young Leaders for Active Citizenship (YLAC), the event examined the implications of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) and its draft Rules, particularly their impact on children and persons with disabilities (PwDs). By bringing together around 200 legal experts, disability rights advocates, and policymakers, the event addresses how the Act balances privacy concerns with accessibility and autonomy for PwDs from varied, multifaceted viewpoints.
Panel Discussion: The Impact of Section 9 and Rule 10(2) on Persons with Disabilities
In the panel discussion, The Impact of Section 9 and Rule 10(2) on Persons with Disabilities, speakers shed light on how the DPDPA’s provisions on guardianship and legal recognition affect PwDs, particularly regarding their digital access and autonomy.
The discussion was moderated by Nipun Malhotra, Director, Policy & Programs and Lead, Disability Rights & Inclusion at TQH-YLAC, and featured Merry Barua (Founder Director, Action For Autism, National Centre for Autism), Damini Ghosh (Senior Resident Fellow and Team Lead, Disability Inclusion and Access, Vidhi), Nivedita Krishna (Founder, Pacta), and Nidhi Goyal (Founder and Executive Director, Rising Flame).
The Infantilization of PwDs in Law and Policy
During the discussion, Merry Barua first highlighted how the DPDPA mistakenly equates PwDs with “eternal children”, reinforcing a perception of incapacity and restricting PwDs’ ability to access digital services independently. She critiqued this one-size-fits-all approach that assumes universal dependency of PwDs, instead of recognising the differing needs of PwDs to recognise their personal agency.
Confusion Over Guardianship Laws
A central point of the discussion was the inconsistencies between specific Acts (the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) and the National Trust Act, 1999 (NT Act)) mentioned under the DPDP Rules in relation to guardianship.
Nivedita Krishna explained that while the NT Act allows guardians to make decisions on behalf of PwDs, the RPwD Act promotes supported decision-making, which enables PwDs to make their own choices with guidance rather than control. Since the DPDPA does not specify which guardianship framework applies, it creates confusion about the extent to which PwDs can control their data and digital presence.
PwDs as Parents: A Legal Blind Spot
Nidhi Goyal added an additional dimension to the discussion by addressing the DPDPA’s failure to acknowledge PwDs as parents as a critical gap in the Act. The law mandates that companies obtain verifiable parental consent for processing minors’ data, but if a PwD is required to have a guardian, their parental authority may be called into question. Goyal illustrated this issue with real-life examples of mothers with disabilities, asking whether the law considers them incapable of providing valid consent for their children’s data processing. This ambiguity could undermine the legal recognition of PwDs as parents, affecting their ability to make essential decisions for their children.
The Lack of Accessibility in the DPDPA
Both Nidhi Goyal and Damini Ghosh criticized the absence of accessibility provisions in the DPDPA. As Nidhi emphasised, the Act requires consent forms to be available in 22 Indian languages but fails to mandate accessibility features such as sign language interpretation or alternative communication formats for PwDs. Without these provisions, many PwDs would be unable to provide informed consent independently.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The panel concluded that the DPDPA needs urgent revisions to ensure that PwDs are not treated as dependents but as individuals with full agency. The speakers emphasized that blanket guardianship rules should be reconsidered, and the law must clarify which guardianship frameworks apply to PwDs. Additionally, PwDs must be recognized as legitimate parents and decision-makers for their children’s data. The discussion also highlighted the necessity of incorporating accessibility standards into the law, ensuring that PwDs can navigate digital spaces independently.