Why in News ?
- Disability rights groups objected to the draft DPDP Rules that clubbed persons with disabilities (PwDs) with children for guardian-based consent.
- Ministry of Electronics & IT revised the final Rules (2025), creating a separate section for PwDs, removing them from child-specific restrictions.
Relevance :
- GS 2: Governance (data protection, rights-based policymaking, digital consent)
- GS 2: Vulnerable Sections (PwD rights, RPWD Act 2016, UNCRPD)
- GS 2: Social Justice (disability autonomy, preventing structural discrimination)
Basics
- DPDP Act, 2023: Governs digital personal data processing based on consent and purpose limitation.
- Draft Rules: Initially treated PwDs and children similarly regarding online consent.
- Issue: PwDs are a diverse group; many can independently manage digital interactions.
What Has Changed ?
- PwDs no longer fall under child-specific restrictions such as:
- Mandatory parental consent for online activities.
- Restrictions on behavioural monitoring or targeted advertising.
- Separate consent framework created specifically for PwDs.
Why the Change Matters ?
- Recognises autonomy and adult legal status of PwDs.
- Avoids structural discrimination caused by equating disability with legal incapacity.
- Aligns with the RPWD Act, 2016 and UNCRPD principles.
Key Issues Still Unresolved
- No Illustrations Provided:
Unlike the children’s section, the PwD section lacks examples for:- Situations requiring guardian consent.
- Situations where independent consent is valid.
- How platforms should assess capacity in digital environments.
- Ambiguity in Guardianship Law:
The rules do not clarify whether:- NT Act, 1999 (based on “decision-making incapacity”), or
- RPWD Act, 2016 (supports autonomy)
should guide guardianship decisions.
- Incomplete Operational Guidance:
No clarity on:- Verification of guardianship status.
- Dispute resolution if a platform doubts the guardian’s legitimacy.
- Treatment of persons with psychosocial disabilities with fluctuating capacity.
Concerns from Activists and Civil Society
- Treating PwDs as a vulnerable group without safeguards risks paternalism.
- Lack of illustrations leaves service providers uncertain, leading to over-cautious blocking of PwDs’ access.
- Many small and marginalised PwD communities may not understand techno-legal implications.
- Fear that outdated NT Act provisions may be used to override autonomy.
Positive Outcomes of the Revision
- Restores rights to personalised services such as:
- Assistive technologies relying on behavioural patterns.
- Targeted content for screen-reader or accessibility purposes.
- Eliminates unnecessary parental/guardian gatekeeping for adult PwDs.
- Indicates a consultative, responsive government policy process.
Way Forward
- Provide detailed guidelines/illustrations for:
- Consent for different disability categories.
- Supported decision-making mechanisms.
- Online guardian verification.
- Amend the DPDP Act wording itself, which still groups children and PwDs together.
- Harmonise guardianship standards:
- Prioritise RPWD Act (2016) over NT Act (1999) to comply with UNCRPD.
