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

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

10957 - Government defends Aadhaar in Rajya Sabha amid setback on Finance Bill amendments - Live Mint

Wed, Mar 29 2017. 09 21 PM IST

The Rajya Sabha saw five amendments moved by the opposition on the Finance Bill being adopted as the government defended its Aadhaar policies

The opposition amendments to the finance bill were adopted with a significant margin, with the difference of votes ranging between 27 and 34 votes in the Rajya Sabha, where the NDA government is in a minority. Photo: PTI

New Delhi: The government on Wednesday faced a major embarrassment in the Rajya Sabha as five amendments moved by the opposition to the Finance Bill 2017 were adopted before the House approved the measure.

Of the five opposition amendments, three were moved by the Congress member Digvijaya Singh and two by Sitaram Yechury of CPI(M). The amendments were adopted with a significant margin, with the difference of votes ranging between 27 and 34 votes.
Trinamool Congress, which has 10 members, staged a walkout before the voting in the House where the ruling National Democratic Alliance is in a minority.

In the 245-member House, the BJP has 56 members while the NDA jointly has 74 members. Earlier, while replying to the debate, finance minister Arun Jaitley strongly defended the government’s endeavour to make Aadhaar compulsory for access to various benefits, saying it was necessary to check frauds, including tax evasion.


While talking about Aadhaar, he admitted that it was a “great initiative” of the previous United Progressive Alliance government and said the NDA dispensation is expanding it. “Earlier, some of us had doubts over Aadhaar...Some of your people (in Congress) also had doubts. Later, a presentation was made to the prime minister (Narendra Modi) where the doubts were cleared,” Jaitley said.

Responding to repeated questions by the Congress members as to why Aadhaar was being made mandatory, he countered by asking why this technology should not be utilised since it was created for public benefit.

Congress leader P. Chidamabaram asked whether the government could give a guarantee that the Aadhaar details would not be leaked through hacking. To this, the finance minister said while hacking could not be ruled out, the firewalls should be made stronger.

“If the firewalls can be broken and hacking can take place, the hacking can take place anywhere,” he said, adding “Hacking does not take place because of Aadhaar” and referred to such an incident that took place at the Pentagon in the US.

When referred to the leakage of Aadhaar details of cricketer M.S. Dhoni, Jaitley said it was the result of an “immature” act by somebody in Ranchi against whom action has been taken. For this reason, the technology cannot be discredited, he said.
One of the amendments moved by Digvijaya Singh related to a clause which gave powers to an assistant commissioner of income tax, rather than the commissioner as prescribed earlier, to order searches. He said junior officers should not be given such powers since the income tax department is already notorious in terms of corruption.

Yechury’s two amendments related to a clause linked to political funding. The amended Finance Bill, which contains provisions for taxation, will now have to be considered again by the Lok Sabha, which can either accept or reject the amendments. If it rejects the amendments, the bill is deemed to have been passed by Parliament.

Jaitley also responded to questions over changes proposed to the income tax laws and asserted that any source who reports about any tax evasion, cannot be allowed to be identified. The finance minister said IT authorities will conduct searches on the basis of “satisfaction note” which will only be disclosed to the Courts and not the target of the investigation.

The provision is aimed at protecting the whistleblower which can be a trade union leader, a disgruntled employee or a dissatisfied partner. His assurances, however, did not cut ice with the Opposition which kept asking questions.

Former finance minister P. Chidambaram’s suggestion that the “satisfaction note” should be shared without disclosing the source of information was rejected by Jaitley, who argued that sharing of the note could be used to track the source of information.

“Nobody can search without satisfactory note. The satisfactory note cannot be made available to the target of the investigation,” Jaitley said. He emphasised the changes in the Finance bill are against “economic offenders” and for the protection of whistle blowers.