uid

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


Special

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

Quotes

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.


Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

11217 - Before SC, Centre Strongly Defends Aadhaar-PAN, IT Returns Linkage BY: LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK MAY 2, 2017 3:49 PM...- Live Law


As the Supreme Court continued hearing on a batch of pleas challenging the constitutionality of Section 139AA inserted in the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act, 2017 which made Aadhaar mandatory for obtaining a PAN and filing IT returns,  the Central government stoutly defended the biometric identification system....

Appearing for the Centre, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said Aadhaar was very essential when the country was witnessing all round progressing especially technologically and it was an essential requirement to keep pace with the growth. 

He said the privacy concerns regarding Aadhaar were “wholly misplaced” and asked “what do you want ? a vacuum? It cannot be like that. An individual has a social contract with the state under which no constituent can say that I don’t want to be identified. The petitioners cannot claim to live in a utopia where they imagine there is no state authority”, Rohatgi argued....

The court was hearing petitions filed by Ramon Magsaysay award winner Bezwada Wilson, former Kerala Minister Binoy Viswam and ex-Army officer S.G. Vombatkere, represented by senior advocates Arvind Datar, Shyam Divan, Sriram Prakkat and Vishnu Sankar challenging the constitutionality of Section 139AA inserted in the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act, 2017. The provision makes Aadhaar mandatory for getting a PAN. Possession of an Aadhaar card is necessary for the continuing validity of an existing PAN and for filing returns under the income tax law.

Slamming a tendency in the country to evade taxes, the Supreme Court  had on the last date of hearing referred to the mandatory linking of Aadhaar to the Permanent Account Number (PAN) and Income Tax returns as an instance of the government’s efforts to bring “new and new laws to stop leakages.” “When tax evasions are there, the government will try to bring new and new laws to stop leakages. We as citizens are like that… we don’t want to pay taxes, shame on us. This conduct and character is seen for example at the time of matrimonial alliance. Then the groom has the best income. The moment the estranged wife files a maintenance application, the same boy is a pauper,” Justice A.K. Sikri, leading a Bench comprising also of Justice Ashok Bhushan, had observed orally on Wednesday. SHYAM DIVAN’S ARGUMENT Arguing on April 27, the last date of hearing, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, arguing for one of the petitioners who challenged Aadhaar-PAN linking under the Income Tax Act, has said before the Supreme Court that the linking is unconstitutional. “It is an illegal bargain of state with an individual for bio-metric details which is not permissible under law or Constitution,” Divan had argued before a bench headed by Justice AK Sikri....

He also argued that Aadhaar is voluntary. It creates right for people, but not duty forcing them to give their personal details to a third party which is not government but a private agency. Forcing a person for biometric detail is intrusion into his body. Nowhere in the world does any state have a system which tracks you 24/7,” he said....

Terming the government “totalitarian “, the senior advocate said the state considers a citizen as a number (Aadhaar), not an individual. “Aadhaar is purely voluntary and forcefully asking for physical detail is totalitarian attitude of state,” he had said

Read more at: http://www.livelaw.in/sc-centre-strongly-defends-aadhaar-pan-returns-linkage/