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

Monday, September 11, 2017

12017 - Right To Privacy, Thou Art Frail! Google, Twitter, WhatsApp, Others Face Supreme Court Wrath Over Data Privacy Concerns -INc42.com



The Country’s Highest Judicial Body Has Raised Concerns About Data Sharing With Cross Border Entities

September 8, 2017 13 min read

The Supreme Court of India has reportedly issued notices to Google and Twitter, in reference to the public interest litigation petition filed against the Internet behemoths over data privacy concerns by Pallav Mongia, an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court. The petition, according to sources, has raised concerns about the lack of control over data sharing with cross-border corporate entities, which could potentially be a violation of the Indian citizens’ right to privacy. Data privacy is increasingly becoming an area of concern in the country, with giants like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Monster India also being inspected for allegedly sharing user data with third-party entities.

The notice has been issued by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court formed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AK Sikri, Amitava Roy, AM Khanwilkar, and M Shantanagoudar. As part of the notice, the country’s highest judicial body, Supreme Court, has asked Google and Twitter to share their legal views on the matter.

Commenting on the development, advocate and CriTaxCorp founder Kanishk Agarwal told Inc42, “In the wake of recent judgement by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India holding “Right to Privacy” as one of the Fundamental Rights, any entity is required to take a user’s informed consent prior to sharing or selling any personal information of that user, as he/she may not be aware, at the time of providing such personal information, that such information can be sold or be misused.”

The petitioner is being represented by senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, advocates Ravi Sharma, Abhinav Goyal, Pankaj Kumar Singh, and Gunjan Mangla. In his petition to the Supreme Court, Mongia has also challenged the constitutional validity of the Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011 (Privacy Rules) as well as the clarification dated 24 August 2011 issued by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.

The petition read, “A bare reading of the clarification clearly shows that the privacy rules do not apply to body corporates outside India like Facebook, Twitter, and Google. The situation is alarming because the Indian arms of these body corporates have stated that they have no control over the content/data/information generated from India and pertaining to Indian users. The content, the website and the data/information generated on facebook.com, twitter.com and Google.com is controlled by Facebook Inc, Twitter Inc and Google Inc which are all body corporates outside India and are exempt from Privacy Rules 2011.”

Facebook Owned Whatsapp Also In Deep Trouble
In a related development, the five-member bench of the Supreme Court of India has reportedly ordered two other Internet giants, Facebook and Whatsapp, to file sworn declarations as to whether they have partaken in any kind of data sharing activities with third-party entities. This comes after two students approached the court over the changes made in WhatsApp’s privacy policy following its acquisition by Facebook.
The petitioners have alleged that WhatsApp shared all its user data with Facebook post the merger, thus violating their right to privacy.
When asked if it is the same as sharing data with third-party companies, Agarwal stated, “If users information, which was shared by users under privacy policy agreed with Whatsapp, was shared with Facebook post acquisition, but without obtaining approval of users with updated privacy policy stating that now data will be shared with Facebook, then such sharing of information is similar to sharing of information with any third-party as any modifications to privacy policy cannot have retrospective effect.”