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

Saturday, April 29, 2017

11187 - PDS foodgrains cannot be denied to all those eligible: High Court - Financial Express

It also sought to know the details of families which have been denied subsidised foodgrains in the absence of Aadhaar cards, which have been made mandatory by the government to avail benefits under the PDS.
By: PTI | New Delhi | Published: April 28, 2017 7:11 PM

The Delhi High Court today made it clear to the Centre that persons entitled under the public distribution system scheme cannot be denied subsidised foodgrains. (PTI)

The Delhi High Court today made it clear to the Centre that persons entitled under the public distribution system (PDS) scheme cannot be denied subsidised foodgrains. A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Anu Malhotra said the “persons entitled under the scheme cannot be denied subsidised foodgrains” and it wanted to ensure that “not only the poor” but all those “eligible” should avail the benefits of the PDS. “However, before extending the benefit, first we need to know that how many are eligible for the scheme and how many of them have been denied the same, in the absence of requisite identity cards,” the bench said. It asked the Centre, the Delhi government and the concerned authorities to produce data on persons covered under the PDS scheme in Delhi.
It also sought to know the details of families which have been denied subsidised foodgrains in the absence of Aadhaar cards, which have been made mandatory by the government to avail benefits under the PDS. The bench further said that unless the details are available, it would not be able to pass any direction. “We also want to ensure that the subsidised foodgrains reach to every poor and needy people of our society,” the bench said and directed the authorities to produce the data in this regard before the next date of hearing on May 25. The court was hearing a PIL seeking quashing of the Centre’s February 8 notification making Aadhaar mandatory for availing benefits under the National Food Security Act (NFSA).
The plea has alleged that the notification violated the basic principle of law enshrined in Article 14 (equality) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution. The Centre has sought dismissal of the PIL, saying a similar plea was pending in the Supreme Court. Terming PDS as a “misused system”, the Centre had told the court that through Aadhaar, its endeavour was to ensure that the real beneficiaries get foodgrains.
The Centre had said it has given time till June 30 to all those who do not have the biometric-based unique identification number to apply for Aadhaar cards. Aadhaar is a 12-digit unique identification number issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) after collecting biometric data of citizens.
The notification came into effect from February 8 in all states and Union Territories (UTs), except Assam, Meghalaya and Jammu and Kashmir. Under the NFSA, which was rolled out across the country in November last year, five kilograms of foodgrains per person is provided each month at Rs 1-3 per kg to over 80 crore people in the country.
A social organisation — Delhi Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan — had moved the high court seeking enforcement of the fundamental right to food to the residents of Delhi, particularly the poor and vulnerable groups which are dependent on subsidised foodgrains distributed by the Delhi government through the PDS, which it claimed was severely impaired by the notification. Challenging the constitutional vires of the Aadhaar/UID project, the plea has said that due to the enforcement of the notification, people were being deprived of their rightful entitlement under the NFSA.

It said the apex court in an interim order in October 2015 had allowed voluntary use of Aadhaar and ruled that no citizen can be denied a service or subsidy for want of it. The plea further alleged that the Centre’s decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for subsidised food goes against the apex court’s interim order and places the most vulnerable at the risk of being left out of the food security net.