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, May 31, 2011

1363 - Food Act subsidy burden can be shared by Centre and states: N C Saxena Irum Khan, Mumbai-Source- FNB News

Irum Khan, Mumbai

The cost for universalisation of the food security law, which is proposed by the National Advisory Council to cover around 85% of rural and 55% of urban population, can be shared by both, the Centre and the state governments.

That means, the Centre could subsidise foodgrains to around 32-35% of the poor and the rest of the population can be subsidised by the respective state governments. The strategy can be adopted for each state, thus making the subsidy burden lighter. The subsidy cost is bound to go up to around Rs 75,000 crore from the present Rs 63,000 crore once the Act is implemented.

This suggestion was made by N C Saxena, NAC member. According to him, a similar work plan could be adopted for all social security schemes like the PDS and health insurance.

“Like in Tamil Nadu, where the state bridges the gap by providing huge food subsidy, other states can do the same,” Saxena said.

With a number of unresolved aspects of the Food Act which are yet to be taken care of, Saxena said that the Act should take more than six months to come about or maybe a year or so.

On different committees giving different poverty estimates, (the Suresh Tendulkar Committee Report vouching for 37% people under poverty line, planning commission figure puts 27% and Saxena's own committee report betting on 50%), Saxena said, “ It is not relevant how to define the poverty line but what is important is to know who all need to be covered by the Act,”

According to him, the poverty level would differ for different states. For example, poverty estimates for states like Orissa and Bihar would be around 55%, for a place like Gorakhpur in UP they would be 58%.

Saxena particularly expressed his discontentment over certain aspects of the Tendulkar committee report, which is the official government report. He pointed out that the identification of poverty estimates in the report for the urban population at 25% is doubtful. The estimation is based on consumption but the need is to look at depreciation level. Like for Mumbai, which was estimated to have around 4% poor population, actually around 53% of the population lived in slums. Though not all slum-dwellers will be poor, at large, the city's poverty estimates should at least be at 10-12%.

Also, how relevant it is to define poverty with reference to Rs 30-35 earnings per day, is a concern too.

NAC has been vouching for the universalisation of the public distribution system plan, which has been subject to a number of debates and queries.

Like, will the country have sufficient foodgrain production to serve the NAC's universalisation plan? And will the plan sustain itself if there is not enough production?

It may be noted that during the last 10 years, food production has been stagnant at around 210-220 million tonnes with an exception of a record 233 million tonnes in 2009. At present India’s population is more than the combined population of Africa and South America. By 2020, the population will be equivalent to the combined population of Africa, North and South America. By 2025, India will overtake China, the most populous country in the world at present. How will the the country manage to provide food to this increasingly growing population?

To this, Saxena replied that the foodgrains production had crossed 233 million tonnes. He admitted that to provide 35 kg of foodgrains to the poor, the country would have to procure around 90 million tonnes of foodgrains. Currently, the procurement is around 60 million tonnes which can be stretched up to 65 million tonnes. Also, the general category could be provided foodgrains at Rs 20 per kg.

However, Saxena pointed out that the country was exporting 7-10 million tonnes of foodgrains. This could be utilised for domestic consumption.

Also, with the growing population, Saxena anticipates poverty level to decline. Hence the plan implementation should not be difficult even after considering impending challenges.

In addition, the strategy is to heavily subsidise those falling below the poverty mark. Those above the poverty line could have subsidised foodgrains at prices below the open market rate but higher than the prices set for the BPL category.

On resorting to cash transfer to subsidise the poor over the current PDS scheme, which has proved to be embarrassment for the country, Saxena said, cash transfer can be adopted on pilot basis. It will have to overcome challenges like banking infrastructure, good registration and encouraging widespread use of debit card. Also the UID (unique identification) system should be in place. Places like Delhi and Indore are using cash transfer methodology for different schemes, thus a pilot scheme will be a good idea.