Democracy and Spyware: The Case of India
dc.contributor.author | Rice, Ahissa Breanna | en |
dc.contributor.committeechair | Brantly, Aaron F. | en |
dc.contributor.committeemember | Avey, Paul C. | en |
dc.contributor.committeemember | Brantly, Nataliya Dubchak | en |
dc.contributor.department | Political Science | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-05-16T08:02:44Z | |
dc.date.available | 2025-05-16T08:02:44Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2025-05-15 | |
dc.description.abstract | There is troubling contradiction between India's status as the world's largest democracy, with a constitution that enshrines privacy as a fundamental right, and the government's routine engagement in invasive digital surveillance of its own citizens. The Pegasus spyware revelations exposed how Indian authorities exploit systemic flaws, legal loopholes, and lack of oversight to illegally spy on dissidents, journalists, opposition figures, and activists, disregarding constitutional guarantees. This study uses the Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) method to compare India's surveillance regime with the European Union's GDPR plus associated frameworks. This comparison aims to find the reasons for differing surveillance practices between the two, despite similar legal and constitutional protections. This analysis will examine five key variables: constitution, laws, policies/regulations, diversity of population, and security. This analysis focuses on weaknesses in India's laws that enable government overreach, focusing on the insufficient oversight and highlighting the need for reforms to adjust surveillance practices with democratic norms. This study which examines the important discrepancy between India's strong privacy rights as outlined in law and its largely unregulated surveillance powers, highlights the urgent need for thorough reforms. These reforms are necessary to limit surveillance powers, to firmly enshrine due process, and to enable independent oversight. A comparative analysis between India and the EU aims to better understand the reasons and factors leading to the misuse of surveillance powers in India, and to also lead towards potential solutions to better safeguard citizens' rights in the digital age. This thesis contributes to the ongoing discussion about how democracies manage the challenges caused by these modern surveillance technologies and how democracies do this while still upholding and protecting both the rule of law and individual privacy rights. | en |
dc.description.abstractgeneral | This research paper examines India's status as the world's largest democracy with a constitution that enshrines privacy as a fundamental right that contradicts these terms by use of intrusive surveillance technologies being directed against its own citizens. This study reveals how similar democratic systems have developed drastically different approaches when it comes to surveillance practices through comparative analysis using Mill's Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) with the European Union. India's usage of Pegasus spyware against journalists, activists, and political dissidents highlights this ongoing issue. This paper identifies specific institutional weaknesses that enable surveillance overreach despite India's constitutional protections by analyzing five key variables: constitution, laws, policy/ regulatory, diversity, and security. Independent oversight mechanisms and judicial checks on executive power are needed based on the findings showing that constitutional privacy guarantees alone are not sufficient. India and the EU both face many similar security challenges, but their institutions respond in very different ways. The EU requires strict judicial authorization and also tests the proportionality for surveillance, but India allows broad exemptions for government agencies and also minimizes accountability. This research paper contributes to the understanding of how democratic principles can be weakened through institutional choices in the digital age, highlighting that there is a need for reforms and transparency in order to protect democratic values in an increasingly digitalized world. | en |
dc.description.degree | Master of Arts | en |
dc.format.medium | ETD | en |
dc.identifier.other | vt_gsexam:43397 | en |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10919/132491 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Virginia Tech | en |
dc.rights | In Copyright | en |
dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en |
dc.subject | Democracy | en |
dc.subject | spyware | en |
dc.subject | digital surveillance | en |
dc.subject | Pegasus | en |
dc.subject | privacy rights | en |
dc.subject | India | en |
dc.subject | European Union | en |
dc.subject | Comparative analysis | en |
dc.subject | MSSD | en |
dc.title | Democracy and Spyware: The Case of India | en |
dc.type | Thesis | en |
thesis.degree.discipline | Political Science | en |
thesis.degree.grantor | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | en |
thesis.degree.level | masters | en |
thesis.degree.name | Master of Arts | en |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1