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

Sunday, March 13, 2011

1176 - Welfare Must Walk The Talk by A.K. SHIVA KUMAR NAC Member- Source Out Look India

Welfare Must Walk The Talk
Social priorities have received scant fiscal attention
A.K. SHIVA KUMAR (Member of the National Advisory Council)

There is good reason to feel let down by this year’s budget for the advancement of social sectors. The disappointment is more given that the Union finance minister opened his speech by stating that “we are reaching the end of a remarkable fiscal year” and followed it up by immediate assertions that “growth in 2010-11 has been swift and broad-based”, that “the economy is back to its pre-crisis growth trajectory”. After acknowledging that “there is much that still needs to be done, especially in rural India” and that “the implementation gaps, leakages from public programmes and the quality of our outcomes are a serious challenge”, he assured us that he does “not foresee resources being a major constraint, at least not in the medium term”. From here on, the mystery deepens. What are the social priorities? What is the fiscal strategy? Where are we headed? This year’s budget fails to provide answers to these vital questions.

The fiscal intent of this year’s budget does not match many national, or even governmental, social priorities. Take child under-nutrition, the levels of which continue to be unacceptably high. At the first meeting of the prime minister’s national council on India’s nutrition challenges in November 2010, all agreed that the Integrated Child Development Services require strengthening and restructuring. A decision was taken to prepare a multi-sectoral programme to address maternal and child malnutrition in 200 selected high-burden districts. The budget is silent on how this new pledge will be fulfilled. The increased allocations by a paltry Rs 615 crore, much of which will be absorbed by the well-justified and much-needed doubling in the remuneration of women anganwadi workers and their helpers, is vastly insufficient to fund the ambitious blueprint for strengthening and restructuring ICDs.

The meagre allocation to mother and child nutrition will go to the justified pay increase to anganwadi workers, leaving ICDS high & dry.

Take food security, another national priority. The FM assures us that “we are close to the finalisation of the National Food Security Bill which will be introduced in Parliament” this year. The budget provision for food subsidy for 2011-12—around Rs 60,573 crore—exceeds the revised estimates for last year by just Rs 13 crore. Where will the additional subsidies the new food entitlements may require come from? Related discussions have underscored the importance of improving food storage, plugging leakages, strengthening pds, and improving monitoring and evaluation. The budget provides only Rs 5.10 crore for “evaluation, monitoring and research in foodgrains management and strengthening of public distribution system”.
 
Take health. It is well known that low public spending on health leads to impoverishment, inadequate public provision, poor reach, unequal access, poor quality and costly healthcare services. With private out-of-pocket spending on health accounting for 78 per cent of total health expenditure (incidentally, it is 61 per cent in China, 54 per cent in Sri Lanka and 36 per cent in Thailand), close to 90 per cent of Indians—not just the poor—have very little financial protection. The additional allocation to health reveals no intent or strategy of providing comprehensive quality primary healthcare and financial protection for all.

Again, take sanitation. Despite the fact that over 50 per cent of Indians defecate in the open, the Total Sanitation Campaign gets an additional allocation, over and above the revised estimate for 2010-11, of only Rs 70 crore. Similarly, the reduced allocations for nrega by Rs 100 crore—down from the revised estimate of Rs 40,100 crore for 2010-11 to Rs 40,000 crore for 2011-12—despite the indexation of wages to inflation is not consistent with the government’s priority to provide employment guarantee for the poor.

The disappointment over the budget proposals this year is particularly high because India can so easily use the acceleration in growth rates to rapidly expand social opportunities for all. A budget should honestly respond to the concerns of the voiceless, not just lobbyists. This one doesn’t. A budget should be visionary and inspirational; this one plainly isn’t.

The author is member, NAC; advisor to UNICEF, India; and visiting professor, ISB, Hyderabad.