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

Tuesday, December 15, 2015

9168 - Election officials sore over non-payment of honorarium - The Hindu

RAMANATHAPURAM, December 12, 2015

Election officials sore over non-payment of honorarium
They are yet to receive polling allowance for the Lok Sabha election

Booth-Level Officers (BLOs) and supervisors engaged in summary revision of electoral rolls are upset as they have not received the honorarium for their work under the National Electoral Roll Purification and Authentication Programme (NERPAP).

They could not actively take part in the ongoing arduous summary revision of electoral rolls, due for publication on January 20, 2016, as they are yet to be paid the honorarium of Rs. 2,500 for the BLOs and Rs. 5,000 for supervisors. The BLOs are also yet to be paid their polling allowance for the Lok Sabha election held last year.
Though the government had disbanded the NERPAP in August after the Supreme Court’s ruling on Aadhaar card, the BLOs and supervisors had covered 58 per cent of the 77 per cent of voters having Aadhaar cards in the district but could not get the honorarium, official sources said.
About 1,300 panchayat secretaries, noon-meal workers, schoolteachers, anganwadi workers, village assistants and village administrative officers worked as BLOs and 180 Revenue Inspectors and Deputy Tahsildars as supervisors in the district, the sources said.
The BLOs were also aggrieved that they ended up paying SMS charge every time they messaged about the status of the applications they received for addition, deletion, correction and change of address though they were given toll-free numbers, the sources said.
They would have scrutinised about 28,000 applications during the summary revision, the sources said.
The BLOs and those engaged in the revision work had problems in deleting names of deceased persons as the previous Chief Electoral Officer had insisted that they could delete the names only on receipt of death certificates. As the families failed to submit death certificates, the officials faced problems in deleting the names of the dead. This issue was, however, addressed now as the BLOs were authorised to suo motu take action and delete the names of the deceased voters after serving notices to the families concerned, they said.
Summary revision
Meanwhile, the staff and officers were busy completing the summary revision and the revised electoral rolls with an addition of new voters would be sent for approval by the Electoral Registration Officers on December 25, the sources added.