In 2009, I became extremely concerned with the concept of Unique Identity for various reasons. Connected with many like minded highly educated people who were all concerned.
On 18th May 2010, I started this Blog to capture anything and everything I came across on the topic. This blog with its million hits is a testament to my concerns about loss of privacy and fear of the ID being misused and possible Criminal activities it could lead to.
In 2017 the Supreme Court of India gave its verdict after one of the longest hearings on any issue. I did my bit and appealed to the Supreme Court Judges too through an On Line Petition.
In 2019 the Aadhaar Legislation has been revised and passed by the two houses of the Parliament of India making it Legal. I am no Legal Eagle so my Opinion carries no weight except with people opposed to the very concept.
In 2019, this Blog now just captures on a Daily Basis list of Articles Published on anything to do with Aadhaar as obtained from Daily Google Searches and nothing more. Cannot burn the midnight candle any longer.
"In Matters of Conscience, the Law of Majority has no place"- Mahatma Gandhi
Ram Krishnaswamy
Sydney, Australia.

Aadhaar

The UIDAI has taken two successive governments in India and the entire world for a ride. It identifies nothing. It is not unique. The entire UID data has never been verified and audited. The UID cannot be used for governance, financial databases or anything. It’s use is the biggest threat to national security since independence. – Anupam Saraph 2018

When I opposed Aadhaar in 2010 , I was called a BJP stooge. In 2016 I am still opposing Aadhaar for the same reasons and I am told I am a Congress die hard. No one wants to see why I oppose Aadhaar as it is too difficult. Plus Aadhaar is FREE so why not get one ? Ram Krishnaswamy

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.-Mahatma Gandhi

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.Mahatma Gandhi

“The invasion of privacy is of no consequence because privacy is not a fundamental right and has no meaning under Article 21. The right to privacy is not a guaranteed under the constitution, because privacy is not a fundamental right.” Article 21 of the Indian constitution refers to the right to life and liberty -Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi

“There is merit in the complaints. You are unwittingly allowing snooping, harassment and commercial exploitation. The information about an individual obtained by the UIDAI while issuing an Aadhaar card shall not be used for any other purpose, save as above, except as may be directed by a court for the purpose of criminal investigation.”-A three judge bench headed by Justice J Chelameswar said in an interim order.

Legal scholar Usha Ramanathan describes UID as an inverse of sunshine laws like the Right to Information. While the RTI makes the state transparent to the citizen, the UID does the inverse: it makes the citizen transparent to the state, she says.

Good idea gone bad
I have written earlier that UID/Aadhaar was a poorly designed, unreliable and expensive solution to the really good idea of providing national identification for over a billion Indians. My petition contends that UID in its current form violates the right to privacy of a citizen, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. This is because sensitive biometric and demographic information of citizens are with enrolment agencies, registrars and sub-registrars who have no legal liability for any misuse of this data. This petition has opened up the larger discussion on privacy rights for Indians. The current Article 21 interpretation by the Supreme Court was done decades ago, before the advent of internet and today’s technology and all the new privacy challenges that have arisen as a consequence.

Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP Rajya Sabha

“What is Aadhaar? There is enormous confusion. That Aadhaar will identify people who are entitled for subsidy. No. Aadhaar doesn’t determine who is eligible and who isn’t,” Jairam Ramesh

But Aadhaar has been mythologised during the previous government by its creators into some technology super force that will transform governance in a miraculous manner. I even read an article recently that compared Aadhaar to some revolution and quoted a 1930s historian, Will Durant.Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Rajya Sabha MP

“I know you will say that it is not mandatory. But, it is compulsorily mandatorily voluntary,” Jairam Ramesh, Rajya Saba April 2017.

August 24, 2017: The nine-judge Constitution Bench rules that right to privacy is “intrinsic to life and liberty”and is inherently protected under the various fundamental freedoms enshrined under Part III of the Indian Constitution

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the World; indeed it's the only thing that ever has"

“Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.” -Edward Snowden

In the Supreme Court, Meenakshi Arora, one of the senior counsel in the case, compared it to living under a general, perpetual, nation-wide criminal warrant.

Had never thought of it that way, but living in the Aadhaar universe is like living in a prison. All of us are treated like criminals with barely any rights or recourse and gatekeepers have absolute power on you and your life.

Announcing the launch of the # BreakAadhaarChainscampaign, culminating with events in multiple cities on 12th Jan. This is the last opportunity to make your voice heard before the Supreme Court hearings start on 17th Jan 2018. In collaboration with @no2uidand@rozi_roti.

UIDAI's security seems to be founded on four time tested pillars of security idiocy

1) Denial

2) Issue fiats and point finger

3) Shoot messenger

4) Bury head in sand.

God Save India

Friday, July 31, 2015

8406 - RTA Aadhaar obsession leaves citizens fuming - TNN


Srinath Vudali,TNN | Jul 31, 2015, 01.30 AM IST

HYDERABAD: K Jaya Prasad, a businessman, wanted termination of hypothecation on his Maruti Alto's registration certificate and subsequently wanted to put it up for sale. However, his plans went for a toss as RTA-Khairatabad officials insisted on his Aadhaar card, which he did not have, to entertain his application. Incidentally, the Supreme Court had made it clear some time ago that Aadhaar should not be made mandatory for any transaction. 

Like Jaya Prasad, hundreds of applicants have been turned away in the past four days by transport officials for want of Aadhaar. On July 27, the transport department made Aadhaar mandatory for any transaction. "The Supreme Court had made it clear that Aadhaar should not be made mandatory, but my application was rejected as I do not have one. I was ready to produce my passport or voter ID or any other ID proof, but authorities are not entertaining any of them," Jaya Prasad, a resident of Narayanguda, said. 

In another case, a B Com student AS Karthik, who had obtained a learner's licence (LL) some months ago, applied for a slot to seek permanent licence, but could not book one as the online application sought his Aadhaar details. As his LL would expire on August 9, he has no option, but renew it till he gets an Aadhaar card. 

In Medchal, a goods vehicle was seized by RTA officials for various violations. Vehicle owner M Santosh was prepared to pay a penalty of nearly Rs 15,000 for failing to comply with tax and other rules, but was turned away as he had no Aadhaar number and the system cannot process the penalty payment. 

Across Telangana, thousands of people have been hit by the new Aadhaar rule, the implementation of which was not announced either through website or media. Officials just pasted notices at their offices a couple of days ago before implementation of the rule. 

When contacted, transport commissioner Sandeep Sultania was inaccessible. Joint transport commissioner (Hyderabad) T Raghunath told TOI that a solution would be worked out in a couple of days for those not possessing Aadhaar. "The commissioner is likely to take a decision on the Aadhaar rule and an announcement will be made soon," Raghunath said. 

8405 - Centre opposes contempt plea in Supreme Court, says Aadhaar cards not mandatory for benefit schemes - Economic Times

By PTI | 30 Jul, 2015, 10.06PM IST

NEW DELHI: Government today opposed in the Supreme Court a plea seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against it, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and others for allegedly insisting on Aadhaar cards to grant benefits of various schemes to citizens, saying it was not mandatory. 

In pursuance of earlier orders, the Centre has conveyed to the states and concerned authorities not to make Aadhaar cards, issued by Unique Identification Authority of India ( UIDAI), mandatory for availing various schemes, Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand told a three-judge bench headed by Justice J Chelameswar. 

The government said that persons, having Aadhaar cards, were being asked to provide it to authorites but this was optional, she told the bench that also comprised Justices S A Bobde and C Nagappan. 

Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, appearing for Mathew Thomas, one of the PIL petitioners, had filed an application seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against the Centre and others including RBI and the Election Commission. 

He had alleged that the Government and others were in violation of earlier orders that had said that no person should be denied any benefit or "suffer" for not having Aadhaar cards. 

"In the meantime, it has been brought to the notice that the Aadhaar identification (card) is being insisted upon by various authorities. We are not going into the specific instances... 

"We expect that the Union of India (UOI) and states and all their functionaries shall adhere to the order dated September 23, 2013," the court had said. 

Prior to this, the bench had said, "no person should suffer for not getting the Aadhaar card in spite of the fact that some authority had issued a circular making it mandatory...". 

The bench is hearing a batch of pleas against decisions of some states to make Aadhaar cards compulsory for a range of activities including salary, provident fund disbursals, marriages and property registrations. 

Earlier, the court had said Aadhaar will not be mandatory and a person, who does not have Aadhaar, should not suffer in availing of government benefits and services like gas connections, vehicle registration, scholarships, marriage registration and provident fund. 

Read more at:

8404 - Chandigarh Woman Fights for Her Right Against Abuse in Cyber Space

THE CITIZEN BUREAU Wednesday, July 29, 2015



CHANDIGARH: For Shalini Kashyap, a harmless consent to get her picture clicked for a feature story in a prestigious English daily, has turned out to be a nightmarish experience. Her ordeal is actually a grim pointer to the invasion of privacy of women in cyber space and abuse while cyber laws and their implementing agencies prove to be ineffective.

Six months of ceaseless efforts to get her privacy back have now brought her back to square one.

Shalini’s ordeal began when she was told by a friend in February 2015 that her picture had been lifted from the daily’s e-paper and was being used for a campaign of the Samajwadi Party on both facebook and twitter. The posting of the picture had drawn a lot many comments, less on the campaign but more on the woman.

The links are as follows: https://twitter.com/Jal_Kukdi/status/562312140350951424
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153119896474224&id=622319223&set=a.10150462471879224.423419.622319223&refid=13

It was embarrassing and disgusting to see lewd comments against my picture. I felt traumatized,” she said. As if this was not enough, she found to her dismay some time later that the very same picture had once again gone viral on a property selling website drawing more comments. “ I felt like an object being used to lure customers,” she told The Citizen.

This led Shalini, a young lawyer, to approach the Cyber Cell of Chandigarh police with the plea that action is taken to get her picture removed from the websites and also against those impinging on her privacy.

Ever since then, the result has come to a naught. “An initial report by the investigating officer was a convoluted one that aimed at closure of the case with the comment that the matter is civil in nature. How can posting of lewd comments and hurting the sensibilities of a woman be dismissed as a civil matter,” she said. She followed up the matter at the top level of the police which led to the Cyber Cell officials being told to rewrite the report.

“What I seek is that the pictures be removed. It would put an end to the stress that I have been bearing,” she said.

The failure of the law enforcing authorities to get this done raises questions about the very purpose of setting up of cyber crime cells and their effectiveness. It also has an angle of copyrights of newspapers being violated with impunity. She dreads opening the links fearing that there would be more comments traumatizing her further.

“I am sure that there are many women like me being abused on the social networking sites. Legal redressal must be provided to them,” she said.

Another round to the Cyber Cell on Monday was futile as the official in-charge there told her that she would have to start off with a fresh application.

She is now planning to take up the matter at other forums besides taking a legal recourse.

8403 - Germans not okay with Facebook's real name policy - ZEE News


Last Updated: Thursday, July 30, 2015 - 17:26

London: Facebook's real name policy has been challenged by a German regulator which ruled that the policy is violative of the right to privacy and urged the social networking site to allow people to use pseudonyms.

The Hamburg data protection authority said on Tuesday that the site could not force users to give official ID such as a passport or identity card, nor could it unilaterally change their chosen names to their "real" names on the site, The Guardian reported.

As per its much-debated 'real name' policy, Facebook limits individuals to one account each and frequently suspends accounts with suspected pseudonyms until the owner can prove their name or the site changed the name to the real one.

"As in many other complaints against Facebook, this case demonstrates that the network wants to enforce the so-called real name policy with no regard to national legislation," Hamburg commissioner for data protection and freedom of information Johannes Caspar was quoted as saying.

He added that the requirement to use a real name violates the rights, enshrined in German law, to use a pseudonym, while requests for digital copies of an official photo ID also contradict the passport and ID card law.

He added that in addition "the unauthorised modification of the pseudonym blatantly violated the right to informational self-determination and constitutes a deliberate infringement of the Data Protection Act".

Facebook has repeatedly clashed with European data regulators, arguing that it should only be bound by the decisions of the Irish data protection office, since its European Union headquarters are based in that nation.

IANS 

8402 - Germany fights Face Book over Real Names Policy

Germany fights Face Book over Real Names Policy


Facebook has been told to allow people to use pseudonyms on its site by a German regulator, which has ruled that the site’s “real name” policy violates the right to privacy.

The Hamburg data protection authority said on Tuesday that the site could not force users to give official ID such as a passport or identity card, nor could it unilaterally change their chosen names to their “real” names on the site.

Facebook’s enforcement of its policy, which limits individuals to one account each and requires that those accounts be held under their real name, frequently results in accounts with suspected pseudonyms being locked by the company until the owner can prove their name, or even just the name being changed back by Facebook.

Johannes Caspar, the Hamburg commissioner for data protection and freedom of information, said: “As in many other complaints against Facebook, this case demonstrates that the network wants to enforce the so-called real names policy with no regard to national legislation.”

He added that the requirement to use a real name violates the rights, enshrined in German law, to use a pseudonym, while requests for digital copies of an official photo ID also contradict the passport and ID card law. In addition, he said that “the unauthorised modification of the pseudonym … blatantly violated the right to informational self-determination and constitutes a deliberate infringement of the Data Protection Act”.

Facebook has repeatedly clashed with European data regulators, arguing that it should only be bound by the decisions of the Irish data protection office, since its EU headquarters are based in that nation. In June, after the Belgian privacy commission took the company to court over user tracking, a Facebook spokesperson said that the privacy commissioner should have worked with them “through a dialogue with us at Facebook Ireland and with our regulator, the Irish data protection commissioner”.

Caspar pre-emptively rejected that argument: “In this case, Facebook can not retreat to the position that the Irish Data Protection Act sets the standard here. Last year the ECJ blocked that position with case-law related to Google’s search engine. Facebook has economic activity in Gemany with its branch in Hamburg. So: if you like our game, you must play by our rules.”
In a statement, a Facebook spokesperson said: “We’re disappointed Facebook’s authentic name policy is being revisited, since German courts have reviewed it on multiple occasions and regulators have determined it fully complies with applicable European data protection law. The use of authentic names on Facebook protects people’s privacy and safety by ensuring people know who they’re sharing and connecting with.”
Facebook’s real name policy has long been one of the most controversial rules on the site. In February, the site was accused of discrimination after a number of Native American activists reported having their accounts suspended or names changed to match European norms. Dana Lone Hill argued that: “Katy Perry’s Left Shark from her Super Bowl halftime show has a Facebook page and we have to prove who we are.”
The policy hit the headlines again in June after Zip, a trans former Facebook employee who was instrumental in introducing the company’s custom gender feature, was required to “prove” her name to the company – the same name that had been on her name badge while she worked for Facebook.
“We use names that don’t match our ID on Facebook for safety, or because we’re trans, or because we’re just straight up not known by our legal names,” Zip wrote.
“Having chosen its policy, Facebook has to enforce it. And because its policy attempts to hammer the reality of names into a constrained model they end up having to make a trade-off in the edge cases. Some people are not allowed to use their names so that everyone else’s can be enforced.”


8401 - Dangerous profiling - Business Standard

DNA profiling Bill needs major changes to protect privacy


Business Standard Editorial Comment  |  New Delhi  July 29, 2015 Last Updated at 21:40 IST

The draft of the Human DNA Profiling Bill is scheduled to be presented in Parliament during the ongoing monsoon session. While a law to regulate the collection, storage and use of the human genetic code is long overdue, this draft has faced strong criticism from civil liberties experts. The act of profiling DNA (or deoxyribonucleic acid) is intrusive in nature. In the absence of a specific privacy law, this draft has substantial scope to violate the privacy of individuals. The draft could also open a political can of worms in that DNA may be used to try and determine caste and religious markers. Ideally, a privacy law that adheres to the recommendations of the A P Shah Commission on Privacy should have been passed before presenting the DNA Bill - and indeed, before rolling out the Aadhaar system, which collects biometric data. However, the government is obviously reluctant to move on the privacy front. Indeed, the Attorney General recently argued that there was no fundamental right to privacy in a recent submission to the Supreme Court. Whatever may be its legal merit or demerit, this is a dangerous and illiberal position to take, and the government should reconsider.

DNA profiling is useful in many criminal cases, to identify bodies in the aftermath of accidents and disasters, and in civil paternity and maternity suits. DNA analysis can also help pinpoint susceptibility to conditions like asthma and diabetes. Medical institutions collect DNA. Inexpensive do-it-yourself kits are also available for DNA collection. In many countries, law enforcement agencies maintain a digital database of the DNA of convicted criminals, and of DNA collected from the scene of unsolved crimes. But any DNA data can also be obfuscated, tampered with, or they can suffer from contamination, or from simple filing error. DNA can be tied to sensitive information such as caste and religion, since criminals and accused in the Indian penal system are automatically classified by caste and religion. For example, the CDFD (Centre for DNA Fingerprinting & Diagnostics) states that it will create DNA marker databases of different caste populations. The framework and utility of this are not in the least clear. Conversely, the possibility of abuse is obvious. DNA can be combined with biometric information and financial attributes like the permanent account number or PAN, medical insurance data, etc, to create a repository of private information about a large number of individuals. These dangers must be guarded against.

The collection, digital storage and use of DNA must be regulated, with best practices mandated and penalties imposed for illegal collection and use. It must also be clearly defined when informed consent is required, and where DNA may be collected without consent. Individuals should be allowed access to their own DNA data. There is also a need to establish norms for deletion, and for control of access to such databases. Most of this is ignored in the draft, which just suggests the establishment of a board to set norms. There must also be clear external oversight of such a DNA Board to ensure that sweeping regulatory powers don't lead to over-reach. Again, this is ignored in the draft. Given the omission of safeguards and the lack of clearly defined regulatory checks and balances, the privacy of both individuals and communities could be at risk if the draft is passed in its current format. If the government is unwilling to first draft and pass an overarching privacy law, these gaps in the proposed DNA Bill must be addressed in detail.



8400 - NPCI gets RBI approval for “Interoperable Cash Deposit”

India Infoline News Service | Mumbai | July 27, 2015 09:47 IST

The proposed service inter-alia has the facility of participating NFS member banks to deposit cash in other bank’s Cash Deposit Machines (CDMs) with cash deposit limit of Rs. 46, 999/- per transaction.

National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) has informed that it submitted a proposal for introducing “Interoperable Cash Deposit” in National Finance Switch (NFS) and has received in principle approval from Reserve Bank of India (RBI) subject to certain conditions. The proposed service inter-alia has the facility of participating NFS member banks to deposit cash in other bank’s Cash Deposit Machines (CDMs) with cash deposit limit of Rs. 46, 999/- per transaction.

Under Aadhaar Enable Payment System (AEPS), banks are providing Aadhaar Enabled and Inter-operable Micro ATMs to their Business Correspondents which are capable of doing payment services for other banks. NPCI has informed that post final approval from RBI, the pilot launch will be done within three months of such approval.


This was stated by Shri Jayant Sinha, Minister of State in Ministry of Finance in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha today. 

8399 - India’s unique identification number: is that a hot number?

Featured Image: “Fingerprint detail on male finger” by Frettie. CC BY 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons.


Perhaps you are on your way to an enrollment center to be photographed, your irises to be screened, and your fingerprints to be recorded. Perhaps, you are already cursing the guys in the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) for making you sweat it out in a long line. That’s why I want to tell you what these guys really do.

Let me begin with some numbers. The UIDAI claims it will assign a number to half of India’s population by 2015: 600 million Indians to be photographed; 1.2 billion irises to be screened; six billion fingerprints to be collected; and 600 million addresses and other personal particulars to be gathered and brought on record.

When the 600 millionth individual is given her number, the UIDAI system will compare it with 599,999,999 photographs, 1,119,999,998 irises, and 12,999,999,999 fingerprints to make sure that the number being assigned is indeed unique. When in full flow, and right now, it is in full flow, the UIDAI system is adding a million names to its database every single day until the task is completed. No system in the world has handled anything on a mind-boggling scale like this.


Image credit: Iris Scan – Biometric Data Collection – Aadhaar – Kolkata by Biswarup Ganguly. CC-BY-3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

You may well ask: what’s wrong with photo identity cards, PINs, or passwords as identifiers? Photographs turn yellow with age, and PINs and password may be forfeited, forgotten or lost, but the body can always provide an unfailing link between the record and the person. The UIDAI system uses biometrics, a far more potent marker. The beauty of biometrics is that it is able to find an anchor for identity in the human body to which data and information can be fixed, so that the biometric identifier becomes the access gateway to the data field.

The UIDAI gives a 12-digit number after receiving and verifying biometric and demographic information. It sends the number along with other information to its central server for verification. The server verifies whether the data sent matches your identity and confirms ‘who you say you are’. Sometimes, funny things happen when the numbers are issued. A unique identification number card was issued in the name of a coriander plant with the photograph of a mobile phone fixed on it. The officials have absolutely no clue of the address to which the card has to be delivered.

Perhaps, the question that is foremost in your mind is: what will the number do for you? Well, if you are below the poverty line, the UIDAI says it is going to do wonders for you. All the subsidies that the government gives to the poor (most subsidies do not reach the poor because the delivery system is so leaky) will now be delivered directly to their doorstep, thanks to the unique identification number.

The unique identification number will make financial inclusion possible for the poor by bringing them benefits directly in cash and giving them the wherewithal for being consumers of the market. The market, by offering a choice of goods, services, experiences, and lifestyles, will enable the poor to define who they are or want to be. They will be free to live their lives in terms of choice and freedom. So, through the unique identification number programme, the government will make the poor free.

If you haven’t got hold of a magic number, please do hurry. You can’t afford to be left out of the bonanza, can you?


S. K. Das is the editor of Making the Poor Free? India's Unique Identification Number. He retired as Member (Finance), Space Commission and Atomic Energy Commission, and Ex-officio Secretary to the Government of India. During his civil service career spanning thirty-six years, he has worked in several important capacities with the Government of Karnataka and the Government of India.

8398 - After taking flak, state orders resurvey of out-of-school kids - TNN

Swati Shinde Gole & Vinamrata Borwankar, TNN | Jul 28, 2015, 

PUNE/MUMBAI: It took 17 days and a lot of flak for the state education department to realize that the July 4 survey to identify out-of-school children did not give a true picture. The education commissioner has ordered repeat of the survey and teachers will have to bear the burden again and complete the task by July 31. 

In a fresh circular issued on July 21, the education department has told teachers that they have forgotten to survey children from migrant families. 

Purshottam Bhapkar, education commissioner, said all the areas surveyed earlier need to be re-visited as the details for Aadhaar card registration for the out-of-school children needs to be found out. 

The provisional report had put the number of out-of-school kids in the state at just around 48,000. Of which, over 18,000 were from the Mumbai region. "NGOs working for brick kiln workers, children working as labourers on sugarcane farms and stone quarries were not too happy about the survey and felt that the figures were under-reported. So we decided to conduct the same survey and incorporate more details including some of the issues raised by the NGOs," said Bhapkar. 

Educationist Heramb Kulkarni, who led the stir after the July 4 survey, said, "It is a welcome move. But the terms and conditions in the circular raise a question on how the survey will be conducted." 

However, BMC, which was in charge of the survey on July 4, is yet to receive the circular. "As of now, we have not received any circular and we do not have any information about it," said BMC education officer Shambhavi Jogi. 


Schools too are unaware about the task. Teachers are, however, unhappy with the decision. A teacher from a BMC school, who was part of the survey work, said, "We were not provided with any allowance or food during the July 4 survey. Doing it along with regular school work is impossible. Adding Aadhaar card details will be extra work too."

8397 - Kishan condemns GHMC move - NANS India

July 28,2015, 02.18 AM  IST | | THE HANS INDIA

Hyderabad:
Telangana BJP president G Kishan Reddy has strongly opposed the Aadhaar seeding of Voter ID cards which was being carried out by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. Speaking to the media here on Monday, Kishan Reddy alleged that the names of thousands of Hindu voters were being removed from electoral rolls in the name of Aadhaar seeding. Aadhaar Voter ID linkage drive

He said he would approach the court against the GHMC's drive. There was no need to link Aadhaar with Voter ID, the BJP president said. Kishan Reddy pointed out that the Supreme Court’s ruling which clearly stated that Aadhaar (Unique Identification Number) was not mandatory. He alleged that the TRS government launched the Aadhaar seeding drive fearing defeat in the forthcoming GHMC elections.

The BJP president accused the TRS government of following in the footsteps of previous YSR government. He ridiculed the State government for calling tenders worth Rs 16,000 crore for Water Grid project while it allocated just Rs. 4,000 crore in the budget. Even before initiating the works on Palamuru Lift Irrigation Project, the State government called for tenders to lay the pipelines. 


He demanded the State government to issue a white paper on the funds released for different welfare schemes. Kishan Reddy also slammed MIM leaders for opposing execution of Mumbai blast convict Yakub Memon. Stating that terrorism has no religion, he accused MIM for linking Yakub Memon with Muslims. 

8396 - IT Secretary R S Sharma appointed as TRAI chairman - Business Standard


Net neutrality, next round of spectrum auctions key issues before the new chairman

Mansi Taneja  |  New Delhi  July 28, 2015 Last Updated at 00:15 IST


Information Technology Secretary Ram Sevak Sharma on Monday was appointed chairman of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai).

“The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet has approved the appointment of Ram Sewak Sharma ... as chairperson Telecom Regulatory Authority of India for a period of three years,” a government order said. The post fell vacant in mid-May when the earlier chairman Rahul Khullar had retired.

Sharma was set to retire in September as secretary of department of electronics and information technology. A 1978-batch IAS officer of the Jharkhand cadre, he was a probable choice because of his familiarity with the telecom and IT sector.

Sharma had worked closely with Nandan Nilekani on the Aadhaar card project. He was director-general and mission director of the Unique Identification Authority of India, responsible for overall implementation of the ambitious project. 

Prior to this, Sharma was chief secretary to the Jharkhand government.  He has also worked in the department of economic affairs and dealt with bilateral and multilateral development agencies like the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. He was also in-charge of financing of infrastructure projects in the highways, ports, airports and telecom sectors.

Sharma holds a Master’s degree in mathematics from Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, and a Master’s in computer science from the University of California, USA, according to his profile on the department of electronics and IT website.

The post assumes importance in the wake of recent debate over net neutrality.  The telecom regulator had called for a consultation paper on the issue but Khullar retired before the recommendations were made. Trai also has to give its views on the next round of spectrum auctions.

Among the other candidates short-listed for Trai chairman were Power Secretary P K Sinha, Information and Broadcasting Secretary Bimal Julka, Commerce Secretary Rajeev Kher, former telecom secretary M F Farooqui, and former Reserve Bank of India deputy governor Subir Gokarn.

Besides, he will have to work on improving quality of service by telecom operators across the country to address frequent call drops.




Thursday, July 30, 2015

8395 - Ram Sewak Sharma: A code writer first, then a bureaucrat! - Economic Times

By ET Bureau | 27 Jul, 2015, 08.16PM IST

Nandan Nilekani, one of the most respected names in the Indian information technology space, once famously described Ram Sewak Sharma, the country's information technology secretary, as "a bureaucrat who can also write code as well as the best software folks I know". 

When the Infosys cofounder was heading the Unique Identification Authority of India ( UIDAI), which is implementing the world's largest biometric database project Aadhaar, Sharma was his chief lieutenant for four years and was largely instrumental in bringing it to life in record time. He even wrote the first version of a client software that was used to enrol people into the Aadhaar database. 

A 1978 batch Jharkhand cadre IAS officer, Sharma is often credited with qualities that one seldom expects in bureaucrats — he's punctual and known to report to work at 9 in the morning, and also he's known to be a quick decision maker and is not averse to risks. 

Among Delhi's top bureaucrats, Sharma is seen as a maverick of sorts and an exception. 

Born into a family of well-to-do farmers in a backward village close to Faridabad in Haryana in 1955, Sharma had to cycle 10 km every day to school as his village had no primary school until a few years ago. 

Incidentally, Sharma did not grow up wanting to be a government official; he wanted to be a scientist, inspired by renowned physicist Meghnad Saha. 

He went on to study at the Allahabad University where Professor Saha once taught. 

He wanted to go overseas for higher studies, but his family wouldn't allow. Sharma did his masters in mathematics from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur in 1976. He joined the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) in 1978. 

But his love for science stayed with him and he fulfilled his dream of doing higher studies overseas more than two decades later — when he took a mid-career break in 2000 to do masters in computer science at the University of California, Riverside, with classmates half his age. 

In recent times, Sharma has been on the vanguard of some key policy initiatives of the Narendra Modi government such as Digital India drive and local electronics manufacturing initiatives. 

The ambitious Digital India project aims to make all government services available to citizen electronically, ensure high-speed internet connectivity in rural areas across country, and make India a preferred destination for electronics manufacturing and ICT solutions, among others. 

The department of information technology is the coordinating agency for the project that is expected to garner Rs 4.5 lakh crore in investments from corporates and create 18 lakh jobs. 

Describing Digital India as a transformative programme, Sharma had recently said it would ensure high-speed internet connectivity reaches every gram panchayat by December 2016. Furthermore, cities with a population of over 10 lakh and tourist centres, he said, would be provided with public Wi-Fi hot spots, making them 'digital cities'. He has also proposed to connect all schools with broadband and deliver Wi-Fi to all secondary and higher secondary schools. 

Incidentally, Sharma is among the candidates shortlisted for the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India chairman's post, which fell vacant in May. Some telecom industry observers believe he has the best shot of becoming Trai chairman 


8394 - Gross violation of Aadhaar rules - HANS India

July 28,2015, 02.53 AM  IST | | THE HANS INDIA

Hyderabad: Call it lack of understanding of rules or ignorance , staff working in Aadhaar enrolment centres have been reportedly insisting women applicants to remove hijab or scarf while completing biometric formalities. Sakina Fatima, a resident of Masab Tank faced such problem when she visited Aadhaar centre at Karvy, Banjara Hills few days ago. 

Even though she argued that many of her family members and relatives took Aadhaar cards earlier with hijab on, the staff at the centre did not pay heed to her. They did not process her application eventually. She did not give up and visited the same centre the following day and spoke to the centre in-charge showing him rules and guidelines prescribed on Aadhaar website. Later, they gave in and took her picture with full hijab.



To her astonishment, the staff at the centre kept asking other women to remove their scarfs even after she made them aware of rules. When she confronted the staff, they asked her to leave the place as her application was already processed. The fumed lady appealed to the authorities to take note of the hardships faced by her.

8393 - #dnaEdit: Negative profiling - dna


Wednesday, 29 July 2015 - 6:50am IST | Agency: dna | From the print edition

In its present form, the government’s plans to institutionalise DNA profiling invest authorities with far too many powers and too few institutional checks

The Human DNA Profiling Bill, as recommended by an official panel, and reportedly slated for introduction in the ongoing session of Parliament, requires wide debate and threadbare analysis, before it is enacted. In a country with lax regard for privacy concerns and a poor track record of policing and forensic agencies, it is necessary to arm this legislation with ironclad privacy and regulatory safeguards before it is deployed in collecting DNA samples and creating DNA profiles. 

The legislation envisages a DNA Profiling Board to oversee national and state DNA data banks, and to prescribe standards for authorities and laboratories in collection, storage, and analysis of body samples and DNA profiles. 

The Bill moots the use of DNA profiles in criminal cases, civil disputes, tracing missing children, and identifying unclaimed bodies. It will make DNA evidence admissible in court, and lead to the creation of databases storing information on crime scenes, convicts, suspects, missing persons, unknown deceased persons, and volunteers. Admittedly, DNA profiling has led to solving of crimes, overturning flawed convictions, and resolution of a variety of civil disputes. But it also comes with concerns that cannot be overlooked.

DNA profiling will involve large databases storing sensitive information that many agencies and entities would wish to gain access to. 

In this context, the absence of constitutional safeguards against privacy violations must be addressed first. 

Only last week, the Centre told the Supreme Court that right to privacy is not a fundamental right despite this being an internationally accepted tenet. The insulation of data banks and laboratories storing DNA profiles and samples from investigating agencies is non-negotiable. 

We already have the example of the Aarushi Talwar case where India’s premier institution, the Hyderabad-based Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics, admitted in 2013 to “typographical errors” in its 2008 DNA profiling report. 

The Talwars claim there were no errors and that the CDFD belatedly made the corrections to bolster the CBI case against them. Though the Bill provides penalties for abusing the DNA database, the minimum punishments are in the order of a few months and not an adequate deterrent. Moreover, the Bill does not address the storage of body samples used to extract DNA, which offers tremendous scope for abuse.

Recently, the Unique Identification Authority of India moved court against a CBI application seeking access to its biometric data on people enrolled in Goa to probe a criminal case. The CBI’s request violates the rights of citizens who voluntarily enrolled for Aadhaar but never authorised unrestricted access to their personal information. The draft Bill invests the DNA Profiling Board with an array of discretionary powers, which the government defends, noting that the technology will evolve over time and it is impractical to approach Parliament with amendments. 

Allowing the DNA Profiling Board to manage the data and then function as a regulator engenders conflict of interest. 

The Bill also allows the collection of intimate body samples “from the genital or anal area, the buttocks and also breasts in the case of a female” from victims, convicts and suspects. Besides being intrusive, such sample collection violates the principle of self-incrimination. Presently, suspects cannot be compelled to participate in test identification parade, polygraph or narco analysis tests without their consent. 

The legislation also proposes DNA profiling for “issues relating to pedigree”. Whether this is an attempt to ascertain caste information must be suspected. Further, one wonders what connection pedigree can have with civil or criminal disputes. 

DNA profiling will certainly boost crime-fighting capabilities, but the hurry to introduce a flawed Bill — without publishing on the government’s excellent MyGov.in citizens’ ideation portal — beats reasoning.

8392 - Regulation, misuse concerns still dog DNA profiling bill - Live Mint


Experts fear such data could be used for non-forensic purposes and are concerned about the vast powers to be vested in proposed DNA profiling board

Nikita Mehta 

The bill seeks Parliament’s approval for plans to create a DNA bank of various offenders in order to prevent repeat offences and to regulate the process by defining infrastructure, training, qualifications, facilities and legalities. Photo: Priyanka Parashar/Mint

New Delhi: A bill aimed at creating a DNA database of offenders, slated for introduction in the monsoon session of Parliament, has been criticized by experts who fear that such information could be used for non-forensic purposes and are concerned about the vast powers sought to vested in a proposed DNA profiling board.

Despite changes made by the Department of Biotechnology, the final draft of the Human DNA Profiling Bill 2015 has drawn flak from the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a non-profit group that works on policy issues.

The bill seeks Parliament’s approval for plans to create a DNA bank of various offenders in order to prevent repeat offences and to regulate the process by defining infrastructure, training, qualifications, facilities and legalities.

The government says that conducting DNA analysis involves working with sensitive information which, if misused, can cause harm to a person or to society. There is, thus, a need to restrict the use of DNA profiles through an Act of Parliament only for lawful purposes of establishing someone’s identity in a criminal or civil case and for other specified purposes.

The bill seeks to establish standards for laboratories, staff qualifications, training, proficiency testing, collection of body substances, custody trail from collection to reporting and a data bank with policies of use and access to information, its retention and deletion.

The offences for which the database can be maintained range from criminal and civil offences to paternity disputes.
“We need this bill because there are so many unresolved cases. A judge can use this data as material evidence and speedy justice can be served,” said M.K. Bhan, former secretary of the department of biotechnology. “Tremendous amount of effort has been taken to consult all possible parties and the bill has been drafted and redrafted over the years,” Bhan added.

In its note of dissent, CIS raised objections about DNA profiling and DNA samples being used for identifying victims of accidents or disasters, for missing persons and in civil disputes. It also objected to the creation and maintenance of a population statistics databank that is to be used, as prescribed, for the purposes of identification.

“One problem is accuracy. Unlike comparisons between digital signatures which can either have matches or no matches, biometric signatures will have a level of accuracy, so there can be a few false matches. Hence unnecessary widening of the data will reduce the accuracy of this system,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director at CIS.

CIS further noted that a DNA Profiling Board proposed by the bill will have vast powers, including those of authorizing procedures for DNA profiling for civil and criminal investigation, drawing up a list of instances for the application of human DNA profiling and undertaking any other activity which in the opinion of the Board advances the purposes of the Act. The DNA Profiling Board will consist of eminent scientists, administrators and law enforcement officers who will administer and carry out other functions assigned to it under the Act.

“Usually when regulators are created, the mandate is extremely clear. In this bill it is quite vague and there should not be so many things left to the discretionary powers of the board,” said Abraham who was part of the consultation process for the bill. He added that a number of changes have been introduced to the bill, including reduction of powers of the board, tighter definitions and more privacy safeguards.

“Any regulatory system requires external auditing, that should be taken into view. Another issue that was being looked at was that the forensic system should be outside police jurisdiction as they may have vested interests,” Bhan said.

The CIS note pointed out that although the bill refers to security and privacy procedures that labs are to follow, these have been left to be drawn up and implemented by the proposed DNA Board.


“This proposal has been doing the rounds for years and I can vouch for the scientific infallibility of using DNA profiling for carrying out justice. That being said, the bill does not provide verifiable or implementable safeguards for misuse of this data and lack of accountability of public servants can cause serious jeopardy to the privacy of citizens,” said K.P.C. Gandhi, a forensic scientist and founder chairman at Truth Labs, an independent forensic science laboratory.

8391 - Two more cases against Modi over 'DNA' remark in Bihar - Business Standard


The leader who filed the case in Muzaffarpur said Modi not only insulted Nitish but also 11 crore people of Bihar


IANS  |  Patna  July 28, 2015 Last Updated at 12:08 IST


Two more cases have been filed against Prime Minister Narendra Modi for questioning the "DNA" of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, a lawyer said here on Tuesday.

Two Janata Dal-United (JD-U) leaders have filed the cases in the Chief Judicial Magistrate's courts in Muzaffarpur and Hajipur districts.

The courts will hear the case on August 1.
The leader who filed the case in Muzaffarpur said Modi not only insulted Nitish but also 11 crore people of Bihar by saying there was some problem with the chief minister's "DNA".
Addressing a public meeting in Muzaffarpur, 70 km from here, Modi on Saturday said, "There seems to be some problem in his DNA because the DNA of democracy is not like that. In a democracy, you give respect even to your political rivals."

8390 - A dangerous convergence - Live Mint


India’s rush in creating a a DNA-profiling system and the reach of Aadhaar pose a danger to civil liberties



Photo: Priyanka Parashar/Mint

Two distinct processes based on questionable premises and exaggerated benefits are converging, threatening individual liberties in India. The convergence can severely undermine existing constitutional interpretation of the right to privacy. The proposed Human DNA Profiling Bill, if passed and enacted as law, is an ambitious project that will gradually expand and catalogue the profile of every Indian. The Unique Identification Authority (UID) of India oversees the assigning of a randomly generated number to each Indian as proof of the person’s identity, regardless of his or her caste, religion or ethnicity. But the authority lacks statutory backing.

Both are technical solutions to address complex human problems. Both are marketed as benign innovations without sinister implications. The UID project, popularly known as Aadhaar, is presented as a simple way to authenticate an individual’s identity and prevent fraud so that benefits reach the right person. For the poor, who lack other forms of identification, the system is meant to eliminate hurdles and reduce the likelihood of corruption. The DNA project aims to assist in solving crimes, identify victims after a natural disaster, and trace missing persons, but the database will include “volunteers” and any other index that regulators wish to add. Both projects have advanced with limited scrutiny of their impact on individual privacy, and in both instances, authorities in charge of the project have said—trust us, there is no hidden agenda.

The DNA project was conceived in the Atal Bihari Vajpayee era, and the UID project during the Manmohan Singh years. There is bipartisan support precisely because it strengthens the state, not the individual; it empowers the government, not the citizens; it extends the reach of the state and its agencies to intrude deeper into people’s lives, offering limited protection to the people.

The underlying message is—trust the government. To be sure, the DNA project can have positive outcomes, such as identifying missing persons or victims of disasters. DNA-based evidence can also establish the innocence of a defendant in a criminal case. Proper identification can, in theory, protect the poor from getting short-changed, and intermediaries will find it harder to inflate the number of beneficiaries and pocket the difference.

But a nationwide database that links individuals with their DNA, connecting personal data with biometric information, gives enormous powers to the state, and there are few credible safeguards. In a Supreme Court case where petitioners challenged the Aadhaar card being made compulsory, attorney general Mukul Rohatgi argued that privacy is not a fundamental right in India. But Shyam Divan and Gopal Subramanium, appearing for the petitioners, countered his narrow interpretation. Rohatgi’s assertion is not as monumental as Niren De’s during the Emergency, when De, then attorney general, said that the right to life was at the mercy of the state. 

But the philosophy is the same—that between the individual and the state, the state triumphs, not the individual.

That assumes a benign state, but no state is truly benign. Democratic countries with superior technologies and well-established search-and-seizure authority have set rigorous standards to protect individual privacy. Their bureaucracies have learned the hard way that over-reliance on data can be counterproductive, and there have been repeated failures of protecting data. Besides, as Edward Snowden’s revelations about the US show, even governments that have strong laws respecting individual rights ignore restraints on their powers. Nobody likes being accused of being soft on terrorism, particularly in times of strife.

The officials who administer Aadhaar may say that they are only assigning random numbers to individuals. But once that database is accessible to other agencies—government and private—they can link or match the data with other databases and get a precise profile of individuals beyond what is strictly necessary: what are their preferences and tastes; to which communities they belong; and with whom they interact. A rogue government can impose mass surveillance on a scale unimagined, enabling the state to track any individual. Databases can be linked easily and there are no safeguards to prevent misuse. Agencies—public and private—have demanded Aadhaar numbers from Indians performing routine transactions or seeking access to government services, without explaining why the numbers are needed.

The DNA-mapping project also categorizes people by caste. What purpose does that serve? When such data is overlaid with data from Aadhaar, which has people’s addresses, it makes the job of identifying specific groups simpler. Given India’s record of communal violence, it is not far-fetched to think that anthropologists, demographers or market researchers are not the only ones who would want access to such data.

Technology can have enormous uses and it would be Luddite to argue against its use. But privacy is too important to be left to technocrats alone. These systems need robust safeguards to protect the individual from the reach of the state. Governments with far clearer constitutional protection for individual rights have failed doing it. What makes Indian authorities so certain they’d get it right?

Salil Tripathi is a writer based in London.
Your comments are welcome at salil@livemint.com. To read Salil Tripathi’s previous columns, go to 
www.livemint.com/saliltripathi

FIRST PUBLISHED: WED, JUL 29 2015. 07 49 PM IST

8389 - There Is A Privacy Issue With The Aadhaar Card by Seetha - Swarajyamag



Seetha is a senior journalist and author

The Benefits Of Aadhaar Cannot Hide The Infirmities In The Project
When Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi argued before the Supreme Court that there was no fundamental right to privacy and petitions challenging the Aadhaar project for violating privacy, should be dismissed, many were dismayed but not surprised. After all, the Narendra Modi government has, from the outset, been giving Aadhaar a big push, never mind that the Bharatiya Janata Party had strongly opposed the project when it was in the opposition, on grounds of both compromising privacy as well as legitimising illegal immigrants. Aadhaar is now the lynchpin of the JAM Trinity – Jan Dhan Yojana-Aadhaar-mobile banking – trinity that the government is banking on for delivering subsidies in a more efficient, effective and economical way.
Giving people a unique identity number and linking it to bank accounts will undoubtedly bring about a massive reduction in the diversion of subsidies and welfare benefits that is rampant in India. But there are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed. A look at the noise over Aadhaar:

The Back Story
The first, hesitant steps to give every citizen an identity card and number were taken by the National Democratic Alliance government of Atal Behari Vajpayee. Called the Multi-Purpose National Identity Card (MNIC) project, its objective was compulsory registration of every citizen and non-citizen living in India in a National Population Register (NPR). Citizens would get a MNIC and number while non-citizens would get a multi-purpose residency card. The Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 were issued that made it compulsory for everyone to be enrolled in the NPR. A pilot project started in 13 states in 2003.

The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government ran with the ball and the Citizenship Act 1955 was amended in 2004 to insert a Section 14A which authorises the central government to compulsorily register every citizen and issue a national identity card.

Two years later, in 2006, the UPA also initiated the Unique Identification (UID) project. To be implemented by the Department of Information Technology, this had an entirely different objective – it was about identifying beneficiaries of welfare programmes and doles and giving them a unique ID so that leakages and diversion could be eliminated.

Later the government decided to bring the two schemes – NPR and UID – together.

As the modalities for this were being worked upon by an empowered group of ministers (EGoM), the Planning Commission suggested setting up a Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI). The government decided to initially anchor it in the Planning Commission for five years and later make it a statutory authority. Accordingly, the UIDAI got established in 2009; it was then that the UID got the Aadhaar name.

The Aadhaar enrolment campaign by the UIDAI was launched in 2010. The enumeration exercise for the 2011 Census by the Registrar General of India (RGI) also started that year; it also involved capture of bio-metrics, though this was done after the enumeration. It was decided that the NPR database would be sent to the UIDAI for bio-metric de-duplication and assigning of a unique ID number which would be added to the NPR database.

Soon the home ministry (then headed by P. Chidambaram) and the Planning Commission were at loggerheads over the two exercises. Chidambaram was not satisfied with what he called “the degree of assurance” with which the UIDAI was going about its task. He felt the NPR was better from the perspective of internal security. Then Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia weighed in on the side of the UIDAI.
As a compromise it was decided that:
  • UIDAI would undertake enrollment for Aadhaar in a specified number of states where it had made significant progress, while the NPR would capture the bio-metrics of people in the rest.
  • In addition to its original target (set in phases) of covering 20 crore people, UIDAI would enroll another 40 crore.
  • The NPR would not capture bio-metrics for people who already had an Aadhaar number/card. It would, however, note the number in its records and source the bio-metric information from UIDAI.
Currently, the NPR bio-metrics collection exercise is going on in 12 states and UIDAI is doing enrolments in 24 states.
The RGI, which does the NPR exercise, sends the bio-metrics it captures to UIDAI for de-duplication and assigning of an Aadhaar number. The NPR, which is kept with the RGI, will have demographic data, bio-metrics and Aadhaar number.

The Design Flaw
Chidambaram was right in voicing security-related concerns over the poor due diligence in the case of Aadhaar and rooting for NPR. The NPR is based on a house-to-house survey. The Aadhaar enrolment only requires people to approach UIDAI with some select documentary proof or, if such proof is not there, through an `introducer’ – anyone from an elected representative (gram pradhan/councillor/MLA/MP) to local teachers, anganwadi workers, doctors, representatives of NGOs, etc. This is what had the home ministry under Chidambaram worried – that the exercise would, willy-nilly, end up legalizing illegal immigrants.

The NPR is about identifying citizens; Aadhaar is only about authenticating the identity of people. Whenever he was quizzed about Aadhaar, former UIDAI chairman Nandan Nilekani would always take pains to clarify that it was not a citizenship document.

Right now, the NPR exercise, like Aadhaar, covers all usual residents in the country. The next step will be to verify citizenship status of everyone in the register. Citizens could get a smart card with the Aadhaar number, but there is no decision on this yet.


The Legal Backing . . . Or Lack of It
The NPR has got legal backing, since the Citizenship (Amendment) Act authorises it. Aadhaar has no legal backing to date. The UIDAI is still functioning on the basis of an executive action – six years after it was set up.

A National Identification Authority of India Bill was tabled in 2010. It proposed the setting up of a National Identification Authority of India (NIAI) to issue Aadhaar numbers to individuals after collecting and verifying specified documents and recording bio-metric information. This would be stored in a centralised depository and those seeking to verify a person’s identity (e.g. banks) could do so by checking the Aadhaar number given to them with this depository. The NIAI can share information about individuals, with their written consent, with government agencies and can share information with security agencies.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance, headed by Yashwant Sinha, rejected the Bill in 2011. Its concerns related to:
  • The Aadhaar number will be available to every resident – citizen or non-citizen.
  • The original mandate of identifying below poverty line families had been exceeded by extending Aadhaar to every resident.
  • The ministries of finance, home and planning, as well as the National Informatics Centre (NIC) had expressed objections to various aspects of the functioning of the UIDAI, which were being ignored.
  • The lack of clarity on whether the Aadhaar number would become compulsory.
  • The possible misuse of the huge database of people and the lack of a data protection law
  • The involvement of a large number of private vendors in an exercise relating to sensitive personal information.
The Bill is still pending, which means the UIDAI is functioning without legal sanction.

Is Aadhaar a Game Changer?
Yes it is, in some respects and for some people.
For the migrant population in cities, who live in slums or unauthorised clusters and keep shifting homes, any work that required them to provide proof of identity and residence – opening a bank account, applying for a ration card or even a gas connection – was always a problem. Aadhaar gave them an identity document that would remain valid wherever they moved. The Jan Dhan Yojana would not have been the resounding success it is if it were not for Aadhaar.

For the government, Aadhaar, when linked with a bank account or a ration card, is a fool-proof way of ensuring that doles, subsidised goods and other welfare benefits go only to the person entitled to it. It also eliminates duplication, a fairly common problem with one ration card being issued in more than one name or migrant workers holding a ration card in the village and in the towns.


True, Aadhaar is only about identification, not eligibility; it does not seek information on income or any of the parameters that put people in the BPL category. Nilekani has also often clarified that Aadhaar does not automatically entitle one for welfare benefits. But while Aadhaar does not certify that X belongs to the BPL category, it will ensure that a dole meant for X goes into his bank account. So it will eliminate chances of, say, a school principal opening a bank account and spiriting away the scholarship money meant for poor students who were not even aware they were getting money. This actually happened in a government school in South Delhi.

The danger: There is, however, a caveat to this. What happens to people who do not get an Aadhaar number/card (homeless people, for example) but may be entitled to government welfare benefits? Will they be denied these benefits because they do not have Aadhaar? There is no conclusive answer to this, but this issue needs to be addressed.

So is the Opposition Unjustified?
No, it is not. The strong opposition to Aadhaar stems primarily from three valid and inter-related concerns, which detract from its admittedly useful aspects:
  • Privacy, or the lack of it, is the biggest problem with the entire Aadhaar project. This is an issue which brings together people of different ideological persuasions, even those who agree with the concept of Aadhaar.
Bio-metric data of individuals is being collected under Aadhaar (yes, also under NPR but there is a difference between the two that will be explained later). There are many private players involved in the whole chain of registering for and generation of Aadhaar numbers before the database finally goes to the government-controlled Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR).

Enrolling individuals for Aadhaar is done by registrars which are mainly government and public sector agencies. But they can hire enrollment agencies which can be private players to collect demographic and bio-metric information. Enrollment agencies cannot outsource work but they can hire enrollment operators and supervisors through third parties.

While the UIDAI claims that it has robust security measures in place to ensure that there is no leak from the CIDR, there is no foolproof system in place to guard against breach of data from any of these points. Or to ensure that enrollment agencies and operators do not keep a copy of the database when they hand it over to the government. Usha Ramanathan, who has been crusading against Aadhaar for several years, has often pointed out the casual manner in which enrollment agencies and operators handle the information available with them.

The UIDAI lists severe penalties for fraud or unauthorized access or use of data, but says “following are the possible criminal penalties in the Bill [the NIAI Bill]”. But the Bill has not been passed yet. Right now the only safeguard against breach of privacy is good behaviour on the part of everyone involved. There is no legal guarantee against it. Remember also that India does not have a data protection law.
  • The lack of legal backing is the second big problem with Aadhaar. Swarajya columnist J. Sai Deepak has written extensively about the problems with Aadhaar. One of the points he makes is that Article 21 of the Constitution, which deals with the fundamental right to life and personal liberty says “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. He also points out the Supreme Court, while delivering judgments in various cases relating to state surveillance and privacy has always emphasized that any action of the government must be backed by a formal statute or legislation.
Saideepak also draws attention to the wide mandate of the UIDAI, which includes defining the usage and applicability of Aadhaar for the delivery of various services. Giving so much power to a body which has no legislative sanction is, indeed, unprecedented and extremely worrying.
  • In its defence, the UIDAI has always held that the fears relating to privacy are unfounded, that the information it collects is very basic – name, gender, date of birth and address – and is already in the public domain in various forms. It also says that it does not divulge any information but only confirms or rejects any bio-metric data that is sent to it for verification.
That argument holds only if Aadhaar is a standalone piece of document that establishes one’s identity. But that is not the case. Aadhaar is the go-to document to access various public services and, as Ramanathan has been pointing out in various articles, is extending to private services as well. This is the third main concern with Aadhaar – the confusion over whether it is voluntary or mandatory and whether the lack of it can be used to deny someone a service. Related to this is the fact that it will become a single point of access to information about everything concerning an individual. That is why the privacy issue is paramount.

If Aadhaar remains, as the original intention was, a document for people who lack proof of identity and address to enable them to access banking services as well as welfare programmes, then there is perhaps not much of a problem. Only those who need such a document will enroll for it and any sharing of information between agencies will relate to name, address and bank account and the welfare provision they are accessing. The only agencies that will be involved will be government departments and banks.

But Aadhaar is not confined to this. A provision in the NIAI Bill allows Aadhaar information to be shared with security agencies. A column in the Aadhaar form asks people to tick if they want the Aadhaar number to be linked to their bank account or whether the information can be shared. When even educated people miss this, it would be too much to expect poor and near-illiterate people to be aware of this provision.

Aadhaar is slowly becoming compulsory for a wide variety of services, despite the Supreme Court ruling that this should not be done. Seeking consent for linking the Aadhaar number with the bank account means nothing when banks insist on customers providing Aadhaar numbers. Income tax assessees are being asked to provide their Aadhaar numbers from the 2015-16 assessment year.

The Election Commission is putting out advertisements asking people to link their Aadhaar numbers with their election identity cards. In Delhi, even witnesses to property-related transactions registered in courts have to provide their Aadhaar numbers. A Goa court asked UIDAI to give the Central Bureau of Investigation the bio-metrics of everyone enrolled under Aadhaar in the state to help it solve a gangrape case, as this report in the Indian Express shows.

The UIDAI may be right in saying that it only verifies if an identity is genuine, but with Aadhaar becoming compulsory for a whole host of services, what is there to stop a government agency tracking all of a person’s actions through the Aadhaar number, without even approaching UIDAI for verification? Or for someone else to do the same without hacking the CIDR?
The government may have sound reason to push Aadhaar. But it needs to address the many genuine concerns that are developing around it.

Also read:

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

8388 - DNA profiling Bill triggers debate - The Hindu

HYDERABAD, July 28, 2015


DNA Bill could result in large scale violation of human rights’.

Stuartpuram, a village in Guntur district, Andhra Pradesh was known for decades as an abode of thieves as the place housed two of the many ex-criminal tribes that the colonial, Criminal Tribes Act of 1924 had declared criminal by birth.

Now, after facing several generations of stigma that included frequent police raids, Sturatpuram is finally teeming with upwardly mobile youth, many of whom are into higher education and small time professional lives.

Will India’s DNA profiling Bill affect the future of these individuals? Will criminal history, credentials of which could be questionable, be linked to people and communities for a lifetime and more, only to be invoked when needed?

Privacy concerns
While scientists who vouch by the DNA Bill give a go ahead for it while brushing aside privacy concerns and fear of social and political misuse of the data, those opposing any the legislation fear that the bill could result in large scale violation of human rights.

“DNA can reveal very personal information about people. And biometric data collection of the scale of this kind has a high potential for misuse and hence the bill itself should have powerful safeguards for privacy that it currently lacks,” said Chinmayi Arun, Research Director of the Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, New Delhi.

Wide scope
Legal experts said that the scope of the Bill was too wide to be implemented in the country. As it allowed the use of DNA data in relation with offences including abortions, paternity disputes and crimes against the law of nature, it could make the databank too large for any sort of use, experts said.
“Does the Bill mean to say that once a criminal always a criminal?” asked Thushar Nirmal Sarathy, an advocate and human rights activist from Trivandrum, Kerala.

The data is collected and stored under indices including, crime scene index, suspects index, offender’s index, missing persons index, unknown deceased persons’ index, volunteers’ index, and such other DNA indices as may be specified by regulations made by the Board.

DNA fingerprinting experts found that the whole process could further slow down the legal framework in the country. G.V. Rao, forensic DNA expert and RTI activist from Hyderabad said that in a country “where the conviction time for major offences is anywhere between 10 to 20 years, there is hardly any need to add DNA profiling to people’s misery. The country is not prepared to conduct such a cumbersome process.”

Scientists were, however, not too worried about the privacy concerns. “The DNA profiling is being done legally in various western countries and it was successful in solving a large number of crime cases. Coming to privacy concerns, there are enough safeguards in place including punishment for misusing the data,” said N Madhusudhan Reddy of DNA Fingerprinting Service, Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad.

A DNA expert, who first proposed recommendations for DNA to be included in criminal evidence, Lalji Singh, former Director of CCMB said “the biggest advantage of Human DNA profiling Bill, if it becomes an Act is that all that the courts have to do will be to follow the DNA evidence.”