Data Localization Rules and Debates
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 14th Sept. 2018
There seems to be a reasonable anxiety about the Data Localization rules. This seems interesting even if not many in news media would have picked it up as of yet. Sadly, the way most commentators are behaving leaves a lot to ponder upon. It’s about the either/or debates with a majority slamming the new rules or drafts around Data localization. There is no thought about “Data access Equanimity for supervisory access as well as business conduct” being brought in, including ‘price’ for maintaining/copying data at other locations. As the tech-economy in India prospers and the services markets opens up or is attempted to be opened up, what the entrepreneurs would need and how to facilitate a greater number of businesses- is the question. Rather than technicality about Data storage or just about privacy as many would like us to believe, but the sham debates would just about focus on that. As one of the large producers as well as consumer of services, India would need a variety of ways to engage with different countries with each one of them having their own regulations. We cannot therefore have some standard practice to deal with 'all service trading nations' without factoring reciprocity as well as complementarity. Service production and delivery itself being highly flexible with much scope of innovation, this complicates the challenge further to devise rules in this regards.
Many of the commentators seem to challenge that domestic market growth itself is being facilitated by investments from global corporate, and how that would get impacted. Some other quite vocal about lack of data security amongst local enterprises. However, instead of creating/drafting and facilitating suitable environment/practices for to-be businesses, this is used to beat the existing local businesses and vouch for ‘global models/giants’. Also, engaging with one or two nations who are currently big importers seem to be the only concern rather than a future where such services can be traded with multiple nations. It might be noted that the global services market itself have developed on the lack of regulations rather than on account of it. Also different nations are different stage of development as well as the debate on this account. Therefore an amount of flexibility as well reciprocity based on some principles and guided by some ‘expert authority’ is the need rather than mere Regulations/Laws. This authority can then interact with industry body and other countries to facilitate business and trade and also evolve regulations/standards that help in further development of the industry. However, instead of acknowledgement of the deficit of expertise, most professionals would simply jump around advocating their version of suitable rules. There is also a lack of acknowledgement about need for trade with quite a few nations and how to evolve such trading in service structurally. Let the ‘Game’ evolve…