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

Friday, December 16, 2011

2109 - 'Lax' Congress members led to rejection of National Identification Authority of India bill - Economic Times

16 DEC, 2011, 03.20AM IST, ET BUREAU


NEW DELHI: Congress slept at the wheel while a parliamentary standing committee considered and rejected three important bills, including a flagship scheme favoured by the prime minister and the Gandhi family, despite enjoying a strong presence in the panel. 

No effort seems to have been spent to brief the members belonging to the party as well as allies and outside supporters of the ruling coalition, as the committee, headed by BJP's Yashwant Sinha, adopted a report harshly critical of the National Identification Authority of India Bill as well as the UID scheme. 

In the 31-member committee, Congress, its UPA allies and outside supporters together had 16 members. While the committee also sent back two other important bills - Insurance Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2008, and The Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2011- it's the outright rejection of the NIA Bill that has most embarrassed the government and the party. 

The UID project, headed by former Infosys CEO Nandan Nilekani, is widely seen as one that enjoys the blessings of the top echelons of the ruling establishment. It enjoys the PM's backing. Congress president Sonia Gandhi issued the first Aadhar number, and the party's powerful general secretary Rahul Gandhi speaks about it frequently during his rallies. 

Rahul recently got Nilekani to speak about UIDAI at the national conclave of the party's student wing, National Students Union of India. 

Not only is the project seen as one that will help streamline delivery of over Rs 300,000 crore worth of welfare spending, it was also seen as an early experiment in attracting private sector talent to solve administrative challenges. 

The bill, that seeks to transform the UIDAI setup into a statutory authority, came in for rough treatment at the hands of the panel. "The committee would urge the government to reconsider and review the UID scheme as also the proposals contained in the bill in all its ramifications and bring forth a fresh legislation before Parliament," Sinha wrote in his concluding remarks. 

Congress MPs now complain about the manner in which the report was adopted. "I requested the chairman that we may adopt the report in the next meeting of the committee as we didn't have sufficient time to study the draft report. He did not listen to me," said member and Congress spokesperson Rashid Alvi, whose dissent note forms one of the only three dissent notes on the report (only two are from Congress MPs). 

"The draft report was circulated just a day in advance. While the Parliament is in session, if you get three bulky reports, where is the time to study? Usually such reports are circulated at least a week in advance," said Manicka Tagore, the other Congress MP who dissented formally. 

The final meeting of the committee took place on December 8, when Parliament came back from prolonged logjam and discussed price rise. Many members chose to attend the house instead of the committee meeting. "The SP and BSP members were neutralised," said a member of the committee who requested anonymity but belongs neither to Congress nor to BJP. 

He declined to elaborate but seemed to refer to a backroom deal where the two parties that are outside supporters of the UPA were persuaded not to object to the report. With elections in UP approaching and Rahul raising the electoral pitch against the two parties, it may not have taken much convincing anyway. 

Yashwant Sinha says the complaints are without merit. Responding to Alvi's complaint that his request about adopting the report on a later date went unheeded, Sinha said procedurally that could be allowed only if someone points out a factual error in the preparation of the report. 

Sinha added it was normal practice to circulate the draft report just a day in advance. "If they knew the reports were going to be adopted, and they did not read it, it just means they failed in doing their duty," Sinha said.
__________________________