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, November 2, 2010

780 - Aadhaar or UID - What and Why ? - INDUS- Social Pupil Blog Spot


28th October 2010


"...I have never known legislation of this nature being directed against free men in any part of the world. I know that indentured Indians in Natal are subject to a drastic system of passes, but these poor fellows can hardly be classed as free men."
Mahatma Gandhi

"...giving of finger prints, required by the Ordinance, was quite a novelty in South Africa. With a view to seeing some literature on the subject, I read a volume on finger impressions by Mr. Henry, a police officer, from which I gathered that finger prints were required by law only from criminals."
Mahatma Gandhi

“The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy”.
Alex Carey, a noted Australian activist.
 
A project that proposes to give every resident a “unique identity number” is a matter of great concern for those working on issues of food security, NREGA, migration,
technology, decentralisation, constitutionalism, civil liberties and human rights. The process of setting up the Unique Identifi cation Authority of India (UIDAI) has resulted in very little, if any, discussion about this project and its effects and fallout. It is intended to collect demographic data about
all residents in the country.
 
Before it goes any further, we consider it imperative that the following be done:

(i) Do a feasibility study: There are claims made in relation to the project, about what it can do for the PDS and NREGA, for instance, which does not refl ect any understanding
of the situation on the ground. The project documents do not say what other effects the project may have, including
its potential to be intrusive and violative of privacy, who may handle the data. 

(ii) Do a cost-benefi t analysis: It is reported that the UIDAI estimates the project will cost Rs 45,000 crore to the exchequer in the next four years. This does not seem to include the costs that will be incurred by the registrars, enrollers, the internal systems costs that the PDs system will have to budget if it is to be able to use the UID, the estimated cost to the end user and to the number holder. 

(iii) In a system such as this, a mere statement that the UIDAI will deal with the security of the data is obviously insuffi cient. How does the UIDAI propose to deal with data theft?

(iv) The involvement of fi rms such as Ernst & Young and Accenture raises further questions about who will have access to the data, and what that means to the people of India. The questions have been raised which have not been addressed so far, including those about:
 
(i) Privacy: It is only now that the Department of Personnel and Training is said to be working on a draft of a privacy law, but nothing is out for discussion, 
(ii) Surveillance:
This technology, and the existence of the UID number, and its working, could result in increasing the potential for surveillance, 
(iii) Profi ling, 
(iv) Tracking, and 
(v) Convergence, by which those with access to state power, as well as companies, could collate information about each individual with the help of the UID number. National IDs have been abandoned in the US, Australia and the uk. The reasons have predominantly been costs and privacy.

If it is too expensive for the US with a population of 308 million, and the UK with 61 million people, and Australia with 21 million people, it is being asked why India thinks it can prioritise its spending in this direction. In the UK the home secretary explained that they were abandoning the project because it would otherwise be “intrusive bullying” by the State, and that the government intended to be the “servant” of the people, and not their “master”. Is there a lesson in it for us?

This is a project that could change the status of the people in this country, with effects on our security and consti tutional rights. So a consideration of all aspects of the project should be undertaken with this in mind.

We, therefore, ask that the project be halted; a feasibility study be done covering all aspects of this issue; experts be tasked with studying its constitutionality; the law on privacy be urgently worked on (this will affect matters way beyond the UID project); a cost-benefi t analysis be done; a public, informed debate be conducted before any such major change be brought in.

Justice V R Krishna Iyer, Romila Thapar, K G Kannabiran, S R Sankaran, Upendra Baxi, Shohini Ghosh, Bezwada Wilson, Trilochan Sastry, Jagdeep Chhokar, Justice A P Shah,
and others. (Based on a statement issued on 28 September)


Aadhaar, meaning ‘foundation’ or ‘base’ (ironically al-Qa'ida!) is India’s attempt to provide an Unique Identity (UID) number to every person residing in india (and presumably every Indian citizen whether living in India or not).

The Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI) will collect the following data fields and biometrics for issuing a UID

Name
Date of birth
Gender
Father's/ Husband's/ Guardian's name and UID (optional for adult residents)
Mother's/ Wife's/ Guardian's name and UID (optional for adult residents)
Introducer's name and UID ( in case of lack of documents)
Address
All ten finger prints
Photograph
Both iris scans.
 
As per the report of Demographic Data Standards and Verification Procedure (DDSVP) Committee set up by UIDAI report of Demographic Data Standards and Verification Procedure (DDSVP) Committee set up by UIDAI, the address details to be collected from the citizens will have the following fields: Building, Street, Village-Town-City, District, State, Pin Code etc. As per the Know Your Resident (KYR) plus concept of UIDAI, additional fields could be included by the Registrar. It is suggested that the name of the relevant Village Panchayat (VP) may be added as an additional data field.

UIDAI has been set up to manage this task.
When India’s UID project was set up and the well respected Nandan Nilekani took over as the helmsman UIDAI, his senior—and perhaps more respected—colleague at Infosys Narayana Murthy said that it was like a younger brother leaving home. In the months since then, UIDAI has turned out to be contentious: from those who say that it is the one sure shot solution to india’s problems—from security to poverty allieviation—to those who warn that it is more of a big brother act, gutting the constitution—and everything else—in its path.

There has been a lot of hype about the new technological magic bullet that will suddenly ‘provide an identity to every Indian’ with Nilekani (*) even proclaiming that UID isn't just a number, it is an identity, result in ‘financial inclusion’ and enhanced security. Some of the more fantastic claims include better jobs, better pay and access to banks.

The retort has been from the dismissive ‘hey, didn’t we have names before?! And weren’t passports and ration cards issued based on that?’, to the more measured position that each of these claims is patently false, and known to those pushing for this colossal technological, financial and administrative scam. Given the circumstances of poverty and ignorance of large sections of Indian citizens, it is akin to grabbing the food from a child’s mouth.

UIDAI has hired five experts to help communicate different messages to different sections of the Indian population for a buy in. Due to government regulations, the five specialists advise in an individual capacity and not as representatives of their organizations.

Let us look at each of these claims one by one. We need to ask the more fundamental questions such as 
Do we need this? 
What is the problem we are trying to solve? 
Is this a solution to the defined problem? 
What has been the global experience? 
Is this just a solution looking for a problem?