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

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

1378 - NAC draft Food Bill: PDS gets legal backing & eminent panel- Indian Express

Posted: Tue Jun 07 2011, 02:45 hrs
New Delhi:

In the season of draft Bills, the Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council has come out with its draft of the National Food Security Act, 2011, that gives legal backing to the highly leaky PDS system, thereby excluding innovative options like cash transfers, which may have included variants like food stamps and UID-linked smart cards.

Despite the PM’s panel objecting to universal legal entitlement, the draft says that “not less than 90% of all rural households” and “not less than 50% of all urban households” will be legally entitled to subsidized foodgrains.

The draft Bill, finalized last week, has legalised the PDS with an elaborate chapter detailing aspects like procurement, storage and distribution through Fair Price Shops as the only approach for implementing the provisions of food security.

It also envisages setting up of a seven-member National Food Commission, to be headed by a sitting or a former Supreme Court judge and similar State Commissions to be presided by a High Court judge.

Required to inquire into all complaints, the Commission “shall have all the powers of a civil court trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure.”

While legalising PDS, the draft Bill makes it mandatory for the government to maintain “financial viability of Fair Price Shops” (FPS) by ensuring “(that) reasonable commissions, salaries for the manager are provided in a time-bound manner.”

It makes it obligatory on the state to set up FPS for delivery of subsidized food grains “within 3 km” of a habitation. While issuing licences for these shops, it has advised State government to “give preference to community institutions or public bodies.”

Inviting comments from the public, the draft has also suggested “daily management of Fair Price Shops shall be done by women or women’s collectives.”

The draft Bill recommends tagging each unit of foodgrain with a unique number. Purpose: to track its movement “from the stage of procurement to delivery to the ultimate beneficiary” with a view to ensure receipt.

It has ruled out the role of the private sector in any kind of operations pertaining to sourcing the food grain. “No private contractors shall be used for the delivery of any entitlements or procurement, storage and distribution for foodgrains,” specifies Section 105 of the proposed Act.

While suggesting appointments to the National Food Commission to be made by a collegium, comprising the Prime Minister as the chair, an SC judge, the Leader of Opposition in both House of Parliament along with the Speaker, the NAC has also called for the inclusion of chairpersons of various national-level statutory bodies.