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, April 28, 2017

11154 - Supreme Court's poser to MPs: Why didn't you object to making Aadhaar mandatory for PAN - Economic Times

By Samanwaya Rautray, ET Bureau | Apr 27, 2017, 12.10 AM IST

Can’t preclude Parliament from enacting legislation: SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said there was nothing prima facie wrong with the Modi government's insistence on linking Permanent Account Number (PAN) of citizens with their Aadhaar numbers to check the endemic problem of tax evasion

"It is a shame that people evade tax... We can understand if there is tax avoidance, but there are tax evasions… Once there is tax evasion, the government has to come out with new provisions. The government is trying to plug all evasions and leakages," Justice AK Sikri said in his preliminary remarks. 

He was sitting alongside Justice Ashok Bhushan and listening to petitions contesting the government’s move to link PAN and Aadhaar numbers. Those that are not linked will lose their validity, according to changes brought in the Finance Bill. 

The government, through its top-most legal officer, Attorney General for India Mukul Rohatgi, defended the move as necessary to weed out fake PANs and check tax evasion and black money. 

In keeping with the top court's marked reluctance recently to wade into areas traditionally considered to be in the executive domain, the bench wondered aloud why it should substitute the house's wisdom on this matter with its own. 

"There are 542 members sitting in Parliament — they don't object. Why should we interfere or object to it?" the bench asked of the latest change in the law, which makes it impossible for citizens to file their income-tax returns without their Aadhaar numbers. 

This remark was made after senior advocates Arvind P Datar and Shyam Divan claimed the move was draconian and oppressive. 

Datar, appearing for CPI leader Binoy Visman, argued that the proposed move did not figure either in the finance minister's speech or objects while moving the amendment to Income Tax Act. The amendment inserted a new Section 133AA, making the link mandatory after July 1, 2017. No reasons were cited to back this decision, Datar said.