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

Thursday, December 8, 2016

10564 - Supreme Court Set to Hear Petition Challenging the Validity of Aadhar Act

First published: October 27, 2016, 9:53 PM IST | 

New Delhi: The Union Cabinet's move to set up an Aadhaar-linked National Academic Depository (NAD) comes on the heels of a Supreme Court hearing on Friday on a writ petition challenging the constitutionality of the new Aadhaar Act.

The Union Cabinet on Thursday approved setting up of NAD as part of its Digital India campaign under which academic awards and certificates are verified, authenticated, accessed and retrieved in a digital depository. The database is linked to Aadhaar, making it the latest such scheme after a recent circular made Aadhaar compulsory for claiming LPG subsidies.

There were petitions earlier in the court, arguing that these linkages are in violation of an interim order by the apex court dated October 15, 2015, that had limited Aadhaar's voluntary use to six schemes (PDS, NREGA, LPG, NEPS, and social assistance programs).

It had prohibited the government from making Aadhaar mandatory for receiving any benefits or services, and hence the government move amounts to contempt of the court, they argued.

Todays writ petition challenging the vires of the Aadhaar act has been moved by SG Vombatkere and Bezwada Wilson.
The case will come up before the bench presided by Justice Chelameswar on Friday.

Prasanna S, a Delhi-based lawyer who had moved the Supreme Court on behalf of social activist Aruna Roy for the earlier contempt petitions, told News18 that linking Aadhaar to NAD is a “gross violation of the Supreme Court order”.

"This move is nothing but contempt of court," he said, adding, "When a student decides to opt for a government or a private job, does he have a choice of not giving his consent? These are false choices. Now all the corporate entities will also join the NAD bandwagon, further compelling a student to be in the depository," Prasanna said.

Not everyone agrees with Prasanna though.

Biju Janata Dal (BJD) leader Bhartruhari Mahtab told News18 that the Narendra Modi government has taken various corrective measures to address the discrepancies that the petitioners have raised. "I don't see any impediment to the NAD being implemented successfully across the country," he said.
In fact, several educational institutions have already voluntarily moved to an Aadhaar-linked online database even before NAD comes into place. Jamia Millia Islamia and Punjabi University, Patiala, among others, recently announced issuance of online graduation and post-graduation certificates, which is also linked to the students' Aadhaar number.

Critics like Dr. Usha Ramanathan, an independent law researcher studying Aadhaar since 2009, maintain that Aadhaar needs to be "called off as a flawed project".

"Time has come for the apex court to be a bulwark against the over-ambitious state," Ramanathan had told News18 a few days before the NAD announcement.

Currently, there are two legal strictures governing the validity of the Aadhaar: one is the apex court order of October 15, 2015, limiting the card's voluntary use to six schemes (PDS, NREGA, LPG, NEPS, & social assistance programs) and prohibits the government from making it mandatory for receiving any benefits or services.

The other is the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, which is under challenge today. Both these strictures have distinct operational status, but recent government directives of making Aadhaar mandatory, petitioners allege, raise the question of whether the interim order of the SC is shadowed by the Aadhaar Act or if the government is in effect defying the orders of the apex court.

A recent directive from the oil ministry making Aadhaar mandatory for claiming LPG subsidy had also fuelled the "contempt" debate. A source in the ministry, however, maintained that the regulation was in accordance with the Aadhaar Act, 2016. "Any person who has an Aadhaar has to produce it, and whoever does not have one will be assisted by the oil companies to enroll for the Aadhaar card," he said, requesting anonymity.