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 scholarUsha Ramanathandescribes 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, November 20, 2015

9055 - Editorial: Guaranteeing that title - Financial Express

Biggest boost to Doing Business will come from this
By: The Financial Express | November 12, 2015 12:11 AM

Though property disputes are probably the single-largest source of litigation in the country, as Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto pointed out decades ago, the impact on productivity is much larger. Without clear titles, banks find it difficult to give loans or enforce collateral, buyers find it time-consuming and costly to hire lawyers to vet property documents, and farmers don’t find it worth their while to invest in improving the land they till through, for instance, investing in water-harvesting schemes. Things are so bad that, while various municipal authorities have no problem collecting property taxes, their receipts clearly state that payment of taxes does not guarantee title to the land/building. Indeed, municipal authorities do not even stand by the veracity of information in their land records—if there is a dispute on the property bought after due diligence at the land records office, the local government does not accept any responsibility for this. The first serious advocacy on this, in India, was done by DC Wadhwa of the Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics who argued that the government should guarantee title—which meant that, if the ownership of any property sale based on its land records was disputed, the government would make good the money. Once the municipal authorities had done their basic checks to authenticate the property data, Wadhwa’s argument was a simple one—while the likelihood of fraud was low, and could be insured against, the gains to the government and the economy in terms of more people doing deals on the basis of property records data would be far higher.

This is precisely what the government is now trying to work on, and technology has come to its rescue in a big way. With satellite technology allowing every single piece of land to be given a distinct number—like an Aadhaar one—what remains is to map this with details of the property in terms of its ownership through purchase/inheritance/gift; other details of occupancy or cultivation can also be tagged on. With 21 states already computerising their record-of-rights and many placing these lists on their websites, the next logical step is to put in place teams of lawyers to start verifying the authenticity of the data. An ideal way to do this is to crowd-source the data, getting property owners to upload the documents they have to verify their claims and, within a certain period of time during which all objections are recorded and disposed off, get a title guaranteed by the local property office. Under normal circumstances, doing this across the country could take decades, but if done correctly, the process could be speeded up immensely—if a land titling authority is created along the lines of UIDAI that built the Aadhaar platform, that body could explore innovative solutions to speed up the process including farming out the authentication work to different agencies across the country and mapping records with existing disputes in various courts across the country. If the Aadhaar programme was one of the UPA’s most significant contributions, the land-titling one could well be a signature project for the NDA.