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

Thursday, May 10, 2018

13503 - Aadhaar should not be made mandatory to give benefits to vulnerable groups, SC told - Live Mint


Senior advocate Shyam Divan told the Supreme Court that it was required to be established whether Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act was being used as an overextension of the coercive powers of the state

Last Published: Wed, May 09 2018. 09 23 PM IST


Curbing terrorism, money laundering, and black money and targeting the delivery of subsidies and benefits have been listed by the Centre as ‘legitimate state interests’ in rolling out Aadhaar. Photo: Mint

New Delhi: Senior advocate Shyam Divan on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that Aadhaar should not be made mandatory to give benefits to vulnerable groups, provide mid-day meals to children or for medical treatments, among others.

Appearing on behalf of petitioners who have challenged the constitutional validity of the 12-digit unique identity number, Divan said it was required to be established whether Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act was being used as an overextension of the coercive powers of the state. Aadhaar cannot be used to create a second class citizenry, Divan added.

Taking the argument forward, Gopal Subramanium, also appearing for petitioners, told the court that since school admissions were being denied for lack of Aadhaar, the legislation was not an enabler.

“It falls on all grounds of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India,” he remarked.

The matter is being heard by a constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra since January.

Subramanium also raised questions on whether Aadhaar was really meant for the oppressed since it was required to be linked with banks, mobile numbers etc. It was also highlighted that the Aadhaar scheme was implemented without a legal framework in place and that it was not possible to retrospectively enact a law.

Curbing terrorism, money laundering, and black money and targeting the delivery of subsidies and benefits have been listed by the Centre as “legitimate state interests” in rolling out Aadhaar.

The matter will be heard next on Thursday.


First Published: Wed, May 09 2018. 09 12 PM IST