Private lives, public uses
By Rahul Matthan
Much of the outrage around the phone-tapping furore appears to focus on the fact that our executive safeguards around personal privacy haven’t been able to protect against passive interception technology. While there is certainly some merit in finding a band-aid to deal with this particular problem, we must ask ourselves whether, in doing so, we are merely plugging a leak when, in fact, we need to change the plumbing.
India does not currently have a data protection legislation. We do not have laws that dictate how much intrusion into personal privacy is permitted and under what circumstances. We, arguably, do not even recognise, legislatively, the concept of personal privacy and the many dimensions of that right that is available to citizens of many other countries of the world.
The judiciary has derived a “right of privacy” from the rights available under Articles 19(1)(a) (the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (the right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India. Through a series of decisions, the Supreme Court held that, the right to privacy though not expressly enumerated as a fundamental right, could certainly be inferred from the other fundamental rights.
However, the problem with a privacy jurisprudence that has developed on a case-by-case basis is that the moment a new technology comes along, our legal system finds itself out of its depth. Hence our lamentable inability to proscribe passive interception, even though we are well armed with both precedent and procedure in the context of wiretapping. Had we enacted a privacy legislation that articulated the four corners of an individual’s right to personal privacy, we would have been able to deal with such challenges no matter what technology was used to abuse it.
Yet there are many who question the need for privacy legislation in India. We are, they argue, after all, not a private people. Culturally, we have no hesitation in freely sharing personal information with friends and strangers alike. More often than not, we do so without thinking twice and, for the most part, face no repercussions for having done so. Public life in India is organised without much thought to safeguarding personal data.
There are many examples of the very public way in which we deal with personal information that might leave visitors to our country aghast. Trains publish detailed personal information (name, age and sex) of all the passengers travelling on that route at every station. Examination results are available on websites and on publicly accessible notice boards with full details of the grades obtained by all students. Many service providers collect detailed personal information as a pre-requisite to registering customers and will deny you services if you do not disclose all the personal information that they request.
Some of the biggest culprits in this regard are government agencies. The NREGA currently publishes, with blatant disregard to privacy implications, complete details of job cards and money received by all who benefit from the scheme. The Election Commission lists its entire database online for all to see, with full information about all eligible citizens. Similarly, various other agencies and instrumentalities of the state collect and publish without regulation or restriction personal information of private citizens in a manner that is unheard of in many jurisdictions around the world. All these entities hold this personal data in huge and thinly protected databases that are open to public scrutiny in order to assure transparency.
So why should we be concerned about whether our personal information is in the public domain? Most of us think nothing of disclosing this information since, in our personal and collective experience, little harm has ever come of it. However, international experience indicates the contrary. As countries began to rely more and more on electronic records in their dealings with their citizens, the more those citizens were exposed to financial, reputational and other harm.
India has, relatively speaking, only just started down the road to digital dependence. Make no mistake, initial though these steps might be, they will lead, irrevocably, to the situation that the rest of the world currently finds itself in. It would, therefore, be short-sighted to assume that there is no need to protect data privacy based solely on India’s cultural past.
In many ways, the phone-tapping scandal has broken at exactly the right time. It brings into focus the need for a legislative solution to the problem of privacy. If only we can rise above creating a quick-fix that deals with the immediate problem and instead work to finding a broader and more lasting solution we will be able to ensure that we have a technology-proof solution to future privacy violations.
The writer is a Bangalore-based lawyer express@expressindia.com
Why this Blog ? News articles in the Wide World of Web, quite often disappear with time, when they are relocated as archives with a different url. Archives in this blog serve as a library for those who are interested in doing Research on Aadhaar Related Topics. Articles are published with details of original publication date and the url.
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
