Government can have just one authority for personal, non-personal data: Kris Gopalakrishnan

The expert committee on non-personal data governance (NPDG) framework has suggested harmonization of authorities for data protection, and having one authority if need be for personal and non-personal data, said the panel's head Kris Gopalakrishnan on November 17.

“We said (in the report that we can have), separate authority, but look at all (data) authorities and make sure that you harmonize them. If need be, have just one authority for all data," Gopalakrishnan, who is the also the co-founder of IT services major Infosys and Chairman at Axilor Ventures, said on the sidelines of the 24^th edition of the Bengaluru Tech Summit.

The comment comes after the committee submitted its final report on non-personal data governance (NPDG) framework to the Ministry of electronics and Information Technology (MeitY).

MeitY had set up the committee headed by Gopalakrishnan to regulate non-personal data. The idea was to set up a framework to unlock the economic value of this data and also address concerns arising out of such data.

“We have given the report to MeitY. Now they will go through their process of how they take it forward. If they come back to the committee with any clarification, we will provide, otherwise our work is over.”

“From the last report to this, it is more of clarifications or explanations or where details are required. The underlying idea is how we make data available for data sharing, so that it can be used for research in a way in which we don't compromise on competition, privacy, etc. So that is what we have endeavored,” Gopalakrishnan said.

While the government’s move to use non-personal data could unlock economic value emerging out of non-personal data, a report by Internet and Mobile Association of India and EY revealed that 76 percent of the companies surveyed said that NPDG might impact the business growth.

“While stakeholders appreciated the efforts of the government to leverage data to be a public good, they believed that the current recommendation could dampen the growth prospects of foreign as well as domestic firms. In this context, experts were of the opinion that the specific use of public good must be studied more closely,” the report said. The report also revealed that there is a need for further clarity on definition for sovereign purpose and public good.

Responding to this, Gopalakrishnan said, “I don't believe so, that is why we have provided these recommendations, we have actually had extensive consultation with industry, we believe that some of those concerns have been addressed.”

On the need for clarity around sovereign purpose and public good, he said, “There is a clear definition on what sovereign purpose is and what public good is. The latter is for overall economic development, social development, etc. So there are no there's no confusion. One is about national security and looking at criminal investigation and that's a sovereign purpose.”