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 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, January 26, 2018

12786 - SC asks Chandigarh High Court to modify order on taking Aadhaar for bail -

Jan 25, 2018 09:23 PM IST | Source: PTI

The January 5 order of the high court had created much chaos in the state, as a large number of accused continued to languish in jails despite getting bail, but not getting release warrants due to delay in verification of Aadhaar.

PTI


The Supreme Court today asked the Chhattisgarh High Court to modify in ten days its order directing all trial courts in the state to mandatorily accept copies of Aadhaar card for releasing an accused on bail.

The January 5 order of the high court had created much hue and cry in the Naxal-affected state, as a large number of accused continued to languish in jails despite getting bail, but not getting release warrants due to delay in verification of Aadhaar and revenue records or surety papers by the police.
With the situation aggravating, a Bilaspur district judge wrote a letter to the High Court on January 10 apprising it about the problems being faced due to the January 5 order, including non-grant of bail to those accused even of petty offences.

The high court took the letter of the district judge on record and instituted another case to deal with the situation. Further hearing of the high court is scheduled on January 29.

Today, a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud disposed of a petition filed by advocate Peeyush Bhatia challenging the high court order and terming it as against the orders of the apex court and the fundamental rights of citizens.

"We have been apprised by the counsel appearing for the Chhattisgarh Bar Council that it has filed an application for modification of the directions issued by the High Court...", the bench said.

It said, "we would request the high court to deal with the application as per law within a span of ten days hence".
Advocate Manohar Pratap, appearing for Bhatia, said the high court order had resulted in the breach of fundamental rights and liberty of citizens, which would be handheld in the domain of the executive as there was no independent machinery to verify the details of Aadhaar.
Pratap sought a stay on the order of high court saying it was creating a lot of difficulties for the people.
Bhatia, who was also present, said since the state was affected by Left-wing extremism, the policemen were taking the help of CRPF to reach remote areas to verify the credentials of the accused who get bail and his sureties.
He said that due to practical problems faced by the authorities in verifying and scrutinising revenue records, the accused person has to remain in jail as his release warrant is not issued.
Advocate Rajesh Pandey, appearing for state Bar Council, said the high court has agreed to modify its January 5 order and the matter should be referred back to it.
The top court bench then said the high court should modify its order within ten days and disposed of the petition.
The high court had issued the guidelines while dealing with a case in which an advocate's clerk had stood surety for an accused to secure bail and fudged the revenue record of another individual by pasting his own picture.
It had said the menace of submission of sureties by fictitious persons to secure bail of an accused needed to be controlled and regulated by all trial courts of the state and the trial court should necessarily obtain a copy of the Aadhaar Card of the accused as well as of the surety.
The high court had directed all trial courts to verify the genuineness of the Aadhaar card of the accused and the surety along with the revenue papers within one week of submission. It had directed the trial courts to lodge an FIR if the revenue or surety papers or the Aadhaar card was found to be forged.
It had even warned judicial officers of disciplinary action if no certification is found on the order sheets of the cases, besides directing revenue officers and the Station House Officers to cooperate with the trial court in the course of verification of the records.