79 Key Issue for Determination The key issue for determination was whether conservatory orders (Decisions arrived at by a Court of law to maintain status quo/current status of affairs) would be granted against the implementation and for suspension of legislations. Summary of Judgement Strong and cogent reasons and a constitutional basis had to be shown before legislation could be suspended at an interlocutory stage. Once such cogent reasons had been established, the Court had power to suspend impugned provisions of a statute. The extent and effect of the amendments made to the Act was not an issue that could be decided at the interlocutory stage and would have to await the final determination of the petitions. That could not, therefore, be a ground for suspending the said amendments. The respondents placed before the Court evidence of public participation carried out. In the light of that evidence and given that the issue of whether the said public participation was sufficient would have to await the final determination of the petitions, that ground did not warrant the suspension of the amendments at an interlocutory stage. At least one of the laws cited by the respondents as providing protection for data, the Computer Misuse and Cyber Crimes Act, 2018 had been suspended. As matters stood, there was no or no specific legislation that provided for the collection, storage, protection and use of data collected by or held by government or other entities. As regards where the public interest felt in light of the respective prejudices that would be caused if the implementation of NIIMS was stayed, it was in the public interest to have an efficient and organised system of registration of persons, and the responsible use of resources in the process, in light of the socio-economic gains of the system that had been illustrated by the respondents. There was, however, also a public interest in ensuring that the said system did not infringe on fundamental rights and freedoms. There was, thus, a need for a balancing of the competing public interest rights while the consolidated petitions were heard, so as to safeguard It required a person to provide an rights and resources, and ensure that the petitions were not identity document issued under a different piece of legislation in order rendered nugatory. to be registered under NIIMS. While on the face of it a case had been made out as regards some elements of the petitioners’ case, the court was not satisfied that the conservatory orders (Decisions arrived at by a Court of law to maintain status quo/current status of affairs) had to issue in the terms prayed by the petitioners. Application partly allowed. The inclusion of Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) as one of the unique identifiers or attributes in the definition of biometric in section 3 of the Registration of Persons Act was suspended, pending the hearing and determination of the consolidated petitions. For the avoidance of doubt, the remaining unique identifiers and attributes contained in the definition of biometric in section 3 and section 5 of the Registration of Persons Act would continue to apply and be in operation. The definition of Global Positioning System Co-ordinate in section 3 of the Registration of Persons Act and the inclusion of Global Positioning System co-ordinates in section CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY RIGHTS CASE DIGEST