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

Monday, October 10, 2011

1689 - Rs 25 for common Man, 1366 times that for Montek Singh Ahluwalia- Justica

On September - 22 - 2011
By Saikat Datta & Neeraj Thakur


The Planning Commission told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that Rs25 a day (Rs32 in urban areas) is “adequate” for Indians to get 1,200 calories of food, good health care and education and, therefore, Indians are not poor. Easy for a Commission to say such a thing because between the deputy chairperson and the members, they take home a neat sum of Rs10.25 lakh in salaries every month.

Add to that perks assured to them and the bill goes up by Rs5 lakh. This, because as deputy chairman of the Planning Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia has the status of a full cabinet minister and gets a salary that hovers around Rs1.10 lakh every month, give or take a few thousand.

His colleagues, the eight members in the commission, hold the rank and pay of a minister of state and draw something in the region of Rs1lakh. Add to that the salary of the lone minister of state, Ashwini Kumar, and you get a bill that would ensure food, health and education for 1,366 people every month if they stuck to the Rs25 per day bounty!

As deputy chairman, Ahluwalia also gets other perks, including a fully furnished rent-free home in Lutyens’ Delhi.

He gets medical treatment free of charge in government-maintained hospitals. Similarly, the other members of the Commission also enjoy all the perks that a minister of state is entitled to, and these usually add another Rs50,000 to their pay packages in monetary terms.

During UPA-1, they would have a party at the residence of a member on a rotational basis every weekend, a source in the Commission told DNA. Which is why, said sources, the Commission saw pitched battles between the members and the deputy chairman before this affidavit was filed.

“We have no idea who was pushing this affidavit but we do know that the prime minister did see it before it was filed in the Supreme Court,” one of the members of the Commission told DNA. Interestingly, the Suresh Tendulkar report that formed the basis for the affidavit was only an exercise to ascertain a methodology to assess the number of below poverty line families in India.

Instead, the Commission used it as the final word on deciding that a family has to starve to be eligible for a welfare scheme. “The Tendulkar committee was meant to just provide a comparable estimate so that policymakers can get an assessment of how to find out how many BPL families exist. How it became the basis for deciding on assessing who are poor is beyond me,” Mihir Shah, one of the members of the Planning Commission told DNA.

According to Shah, the actual data on who is poor can only come after the socio-economic survey undertaken by the ministry of social justice and empowerment gets over.

“That data will give us a more nuanced idea of what is the actual scale of poverty in India. It will show us different segments of the marginalised and give us specific data. Only after we get that data can we formulate a policy,” he said.

Obviously, the Planning Commission and its privileged deputy chairman and his colleagues did not have the patience to wait for the real numbers. Too busy defending corporate India and its interests, they sold out the aam aadmi who had voted the UPA to power twice.