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


Here is what the Parliament Standing Committee on Finance, which examined the draft N I A Bill said.

1. There is no feasibility study of the project]

2. The project was approved in haste

3. The system has far-reaching consequences for national security

4. The project is directionless with no clarity of purpose

5. It is built on unreliable and untested technology

6. The exercise becomes futile in case the project does not continue beyond the present number of 200 million enrolments

7. There is lack of coordination and difference of views between various departments and ministries of government on the project


What was said before the elections:

NPR & UID aiding Aliens – Narendra Modi

"I don't agree to Nandan Nilekeni and his madcap (UID) scheme which he is trying to promote," Senior BJP Leader Yashwant Sinha, Sept 2012

"All we have to show for the hundreds of thousands of crore spent on Aadhar is a Congress ticket for Nilekani" Yashwant Sinha.(27/02/2014)

TV Mohandas Pai, former chief financial officer and head of human resources, tweeted: "selling his soul for power; made his money in the company wedded to meritocracy." Money Life Article

Nilekani’s reporting structure is unprecedented in history; he reports directly to the Prime Minister, thus bypassing all checks and balances in government - Home Minister Chidambaram

To refer to Aadhaar as an anti corruption tool despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary is mystifying. That it is now officially a Rs.50,000 Crores solution searching for an explanation is also without any doubt. -- Statement by Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP & Member, Standing Committee on Finance

Finance minister P Chidambaram’s statement, in an exit interview to this newspaper, that Aadhaar needs to be re-thought completely is probably the last nail in its coffin. :-) Financial Express

The Rural Development Ministry headed by Jairam Ramesh created a road Block and refused to make Aadhaar mandatory for making wage payment to people enrolled under the world’s largest social security scheme NRGA unless all residents are covered.

Tuesday, August 2, 2016


By Vijay Chavan, Pune Mirror | Jul 8, 2016, 02.30

Home dept says card mandatory for filing police complaints, advocates argue it's a gross violation of fundamental rights

A city-based group of lawyers has raised objections against the state home department's recent proposal of making the Aadhaar Card compulsory for filing a police complaint in the state, registering an official complaint with the office of chief minister Devendra Fadnavis.

They have claimed that this is an unconstitutional decision and denial of the right to file a complaint. Speaking to Pune Mirror, advocate Tosif Shaikh said, "This scheme is complete infraction of our fundamental rights under articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life and liberty). The Supreme Court (SC) had confirmed — while clearing all doubts about the validity of the Aadhaar Card to avail of government subsidies — that it is not compulsory and officials who insist on it will be taken to task. But, through various schemes, the government authorities are insisting on the Aadhaar Card for providing government subsidies and basic services to ordinary citizens. We have no option but to approach the SC against the state."

The lawyers contended that in a country like India where the crime rate is high and many citizens do not file complaints due to corruption in the police department, such a decision will only help increase red-tapism. The group has suggested that instead of such arbitrary measures, the home department should think seriously about implementing police reforms eliminating deep-rooted corruption from the police force ranks, thereby bringing in more transparency and accountability.

State director general of police Praveen Dixit had declared last week that this move is aimed at having flawless information about the complainant and would go a long way in helping police assist complainants till their case reaches the logical end. The authorities said it would even help the police bridge the communication gap, if any, with the complainant.

But, this didn't cut much ice with the lawyers, with advocate Sachin Godambe saying, "The SC, in its order dated September 23, 2013, while hearing various petitions challenging the executive order of UIDAI/Aadhaar, has made it clear that it cannot be made mandatory for availing any government service. This decision is a gross violation of the SC order and qualifies for contempt of court proceeding to be initiated against the Maharashtra government." Advocate Vikas Shinde added, "There is a high possibility of misuse of the Aadhaar cards. If the police avoid taking complaints for not having a UIDAI card, then the whole motive will be lost. The police should first motivate people to use it, before making it compulsory."

However, a senior official from the state home department insisted, "The move is being implemented across the state on a low scale and the police are not forcing complainants to get a UIDAI card, if they do not have one. But, gradually, it will be made compulsory."

█ This scheme is complete infraction of our fundamental rights under articles 14 and 21 . The SC had confirmed that it is not compulsory and officials who insist on it would be taken to task.