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, January 23, 2018

12762 - Shutting down Aadhaar is not the answer to the privacy question - Hindustan Times


Every time a new technology has offered new benefits it has, at the same time, had some impact on our current expectation of personal privacy. In every such instance, rather than being shut down, we amended our perceptions of privacy, amending our laws to address the concerns they posed, and establishing a new balance between the benefits that these new technologies provided and the harms that they could cause.
OPINION Updated: Jan 22, 2018 19:20 Ist

Rahul Matthan 



Aadhaar is an identity project that has been introduced into a country that had no reliable means of identity. When you provide identity to a person who has never had it before, you strip him of the anonymity of the crowds.(Pradeep Gaur/Mint)
The battle over Aadhaar is now in its endgame. A five judge bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments about the validity of Aadhaar and will decide, once and for all, whether to uphold it or strike it down. Whichever way the court rules, the consequences will be significant. If it is upheld, and if the concerns of the petitioners as to the security and safety of the identity infrastructure are to be believed, it will result in exclusion, giving the Deep State free rein to misuse its powerful infrastructure for nefarious purposes. If, on the other hand, the project is struck down, the many crores of savings the government has been able to realise as well as the vast infrastructure that is now indispensable for many in the private sector, stands to be destroyed.

Over the past few weeks the debate has risen to a fever pitch. Detractors have not lost any opportunity to pillory the project, and the press has joined in — sometimes sacrificing investigative rigour for TRPs. The UIDAI, for its part has not exactly covered itself with glory, responding incoherently to the concerns being raised and often taking legal action in unseemly haste. But if we can put aside the hyperbole for a moment we will quickly realise that the position we find ourselves in is not entirely without precedent.

Aadhaar is an identity project that has been introduced into a country that had no reliable means of identity. When you provide identity to a person who has never had it before, you strip him of the anonymity of the crowds. For many this is a blessed relief. As long as they remained hidden amongst the crowds, the benefits that were supposed to trickle down never ever reached them. Now that they had an identity – one that no-one else could use – they could finally claim these entitlements themselves. For others, losing the shelter of the crowd has left them exposed, their personal lives subject to unprecedented scrutiny, now that an imperfect identity no longer shields them.

Read more



In the history of privacy, we have stood at this crossroads many times before. Every time a new technology has offered new benefits it has, at the same time, had some impact on our current expectation of personal privacy. The invention of the printing press democratised the written word, bringing the knowledge and entertainment of literature to the masses and ensuring that not just the wealthy could enjoy books. But at the same time, it made it possible for correspondence that was only ever intended to be private, to be published for all to read — giving rise to some of the earliest judgments on violation of privacy. When portable cameras were invented they allowed passers-by to snap pictures of us at unguarded moments producing images that embarrassed or tarnished our reputation and changing forever our expectations of privacy in public spaces.Aadhaar is an evolving endeavour, UIDAI responsive to public concerns | By Nandan Nilekani 
In every previous instance these technologies were denounced and sought to be banned lest they destroy our current way of life. In every such instance, rather than being shut down, we changed our perceptions of privacy, amending our laws to address the concerns they posed, and establishing a new balance between the benefits that these new technologies provided and the harms that they could cause.








Data is the latest technology that is threatening our personal privacy and, as before, the choice is between shutting it down and allowing it to proceed within a new framework of personal privacy. I have no insight into the mind of the five gentlemen who are sitting down to decide this matter but if history is anything to go by, nothing will come of attempting to shut down by brute force, a technology that has already come into its own.
Data-driven decision-making is here to stay and digital identity is just one of the engines that will power its evolution. There is nothing to be gained from railing at the technology. Instead we’d do well to begin to change our current perception of personal privacy. In the immortal words of Wayne Gretzky, we need to “skate to where the puck is going, not where it has been.”

(This is the fourth in a series of by-invitation opinion pieces on Aadhaar)

Rahul Matthan is partner and head of the technology practice group at Trilegal
The views expressed are personal