Modi government reviews the telecom lobby’s plan to mandate A-GPS tracking with no user opt-out—tech giants warn of national security risks for the military, judges, journalists
India’s privacy debate just escalated dramatically. The Modi government is reviewing a telecom industry proposal to force smartphone firms to enable satellite location tracking that is always activated for better surveillance—a move opposed by Apple, Google, and Samsung due to profound privacy concerns, according to Reuters reports citing internal documents, emails, and five industry sources. The proposal comes days after the government was forced to rescind a separate order requiring pre-loaded state cybersecurity apps, marking the second major privacy confrontation in a single week.
Table of Contents
India’s Surveillance Proposal Breakdown
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Proposal Source | Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) – Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel |
| Technology | Always-on A-GPS (satellite + cellular data tracking) |
| User Control | None—location services cannot be disabled |
| Current System | Cellular tower data (imprecise, several meters margin of error) |
| Opposition | Apple, Google, Samsung via India Cellular & Electronics Association (ICEA) |
| Market Size | 735 million smartphones (95%+ Android, rest iOS) |
| Global Precedent | None—no country mandates device-level always-on tracking |
The Telecom Industry’s Case: Precision Over Privacy
The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), which represents Reliance’s Jio and Bharti Airtel, has proposed that precise user locations should only be provided if the government orders smartphone makers to activate A-GPS technology—which uses satellite signals and cellular data. This would require location services to always be activated in smartphones with no option for users to disable them.
For years, the Modi administration has been concerned its agencies do not get precise locations when legal requests are made to telecom firms during investigations. Under the current system, firms are limited to using cellular tower data that can only provide an estimated area location, which can be off by several meters—insufficient for pinpointing targets during counter-terrorism operations, criminal investigations, or intelligence gathering.
The telecom lobby’s frustration extends beyond GPS accuracy. Even the old way of location tracking is becoming problematic, as smartphone makers show a pop-up message to users, alerting them that their “carrier is trying to access your location.” “A target can easily ascertain that he is being tracked by security agencies,” said the telecom group, urging the government to order phone makers to disable the pop-up.
Tech Giants Push Back: “No Precedent Anywhere in the World”
A measure to track device-level location has no precedent anywhere else in the world, lobbying group India Cellular & Electronics Association (ICEA), which represents both Apple and Google, wrote in a confidential July letter to the government. The letter, viewed by Reuters, outlined three critical objections:
1. Privacy Violations at Scale
Always-on tracking converts every smartphone into a permanent surveillance beacon. Unlike current systems where users consent to location sharing per app or service, the proposal eliminates consent entirely—making it impossible to disable tracking even when off-duty, traveling abroad, or engaging in constitutionally protected activities like journalism or activism, according to privacy law analysis.
2. National Security Risks
Apple and Google’s lobby group argued there are significant “legal, privacy, and national security concerns.” It warned their user base would include people from the military, judges, corporate executives and journalists, adding that proposed location tracking risked their security given that they hold sensitive information.
If a military officer’s phone broadcasts real-time satellite coordinates, hostile intelligence agencies could track defense movements. If judges’ locations leak, organized crime could plan attacks. If journalists’ whereabouts are accessible, sources face exposure. The proposal creates systemic vulnerabilities in the name of law enforcement efficiency.
3. Technical Feasibility and Battery Drain
Always-on A-GPS consumes significantly more battery than passive cellular triangulation. For India’s 735 million smartphone users—many in Tier 2/3 cities with inconsistent charging access—mandating continuous satellite tracking could render devices unusable for 8-12 hour workdays. Apple and Samsung’s hardware isn’t optimized for perpetual GPS operation, requiring firmware overhauls that void warranties and disrupt update cycles.
The Week India’s Privacy Debate Exploded
A fierce privacy debate erupted in India this week after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government was forced to rescind an order requiring smartphone makers to preload a state-run cyber safety app on all devices after activists and politicians raised concerns about potential snooping.
That separate controversy—involving the Sandes cybersecurity app—saw the government backtrack within 48 hours following public outcry. Critics noted the app’s permissions included access to contacts, messages, and location data, raising fears of mass surveillance infrastructure disguised as digital safety initiatives.
The always-on GPS proposal represents a more invasive evolution: rather than pre-installing software users could theoretically uninstall, the telecom lobby wants hardware-level tracking baked into device firmware—impossible to circumvent without rooting/jailbreaking (which voids warranties and violates terms of service).
India’s Surveillance Landscape: Context Matters
India is the world’s second-biggest mobile market with 735 million smartphones as of mid-2025, where Google’s Android powers more than 95% of the devices, with the rest using Apple’s iOS. This concentration means the proposal’s impact spans nearly three-quarters of a billion people—second only to China’s smartphone penetration globally.
India’s government already possesses significant surveillance capabilities:
- Lawful intercept systems allowing telecom monitoring with court orders
- Central Monitoring System (CMS) for real-time call interception
- NATGRID (National Intelligence Grid) aggregating databases across 21 agencies
- Aadhaar biometric database linking 1.3 billion identities to services
The always-on GPS proposal would add granular, real-time location intelligence to this ecosystem—creating what privacy advocates describe as a “360-degree surveillance state” where movement, communication, and identity merge into a unified tracking architecture.
Global Comparisons: Where Does This Fit?
Governments worldwide routinely seek new ways to better track cellphone users’ movements or data. Russia has mandated the installation of a state-backed communications app on all mobile phones in the country. However, Russia’s approach focuses on communication interception, not hardware-mandated location broadcasting.
China requires smartphone makers to comply with government data requests but doesn’t mandate always-on GPS for all devices—relying instead on app-level surveillance (WeChat, Alipay) and facial recognition networks. Western democracies like the US, UK, and EU require court warrants for location tracking and prohibit blanket surveillance absent individualized suspicion.
The Indian proposal’s global uniqueness stems from its totality: not targeted surveillance of suspects, but universal, perpetual tracking of all smartphone owners regardless of investigative need. This crosses thresholds even authoritarian regimes have avoided due to technical complexity and public backlash risks.
What Happens Next?
The proposal remains under government review, with no public timeline for decision. Key factors influencing the outcome:
Political Will: Will Modi’s administration push through despite tech industry opposition, or will privacy concerns (following the Sandes app retreat) force reconsideration?
International Pressure: Apple and Google threatening to reduce India operations or escalate to WTO disputes could sway policy—India’s “Make in India” initiative relies heavily on these manufacturers’ local production commitments.
Public Awareness: If the proposal remains bureaucratic (not widely reported in Hindi/regional media), it could pass quietly. Widespread awareness typically triggers activist mobilization and judicial challenges.
Technical Workarounds: Even if mandated, skilled users could employ VPNs, GPS spoofers, or custom ROMs to circumvent tracking—rendering the policy effective only against non-technical populations (precisely the groups most vulnerable to state overreach).
The Stakes for India’s Digital Future
This debate transcends location tracking. It questions whether India’s 1.4 billion citizens will navigate a digital economy with privacy safeguards comparable to democracies, or whether security imperatives justify surveillance infrastructure rivaling China’s authoritarian model.
For tech companies, the stakes are existential: complying sets precedent for other governments to demand similar capabilities. Refusing risks losing access to the world’s second-largest mobile market. The standoff could redefine the global balance between state power and digital privacy in the 2020s.
Also Read: India’s Data Privacy Laws Explained | Smartphone Security Threats 2025
