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

Saturday, December 17, 2011

2112 - ‘Data is secure. Biometrics ensure uniqueness’ - TEHELKA

From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 8, Issue 51, Dated 24 Dec 2011

Q&A Nandan Nilekani, UIDAI Chairman
‘Data is secure. Biometrics ensure uniqueness’

THE PARLIAMENTARY Standing Committee headed by BJP stalwart Yashwant Sinha has found the National Unique Identification Authority of India Bill “unacceptable in its present form”. More rumblings against the UID or Aadhaar scheme have been heard in the corridors of the Planning Commission and the home ministry. Is UPA-II’s big-ticket idea caught in a turf war? UIDAI 

Chairman Nandan Nilekani tells Rohini Mohan in an email interview that doubts about non-accountability, among other things, are baseless.


But is the data secure, especially when UIDAI uses registrars other than the RGI?
UIDAI permits people to enrol anywhere in India with a wide choice of registrars. But most enrolments to date have been by state governments and nationalised banks, relying on proof of identity/address documents. The data collected is subject to high standards of security. We have well laid out protocols of encryption and data security. This was approved by all government agencies, including the RGI and the home ministry. In fact, RGI has itself adopted biometric standards of UIDAI and its private enrolment agencies.


So why not adopt NPR’s suggestion of subjecting data to public scrutiny?
RGI plans to display NPR data lists in prominent places in villages and towns to invite objections from the public, with local authorities looking into objections. This is a method in our system too.


If all functions of Aadhaar were approved, why is there so much apprehension and conflict today? Is the UID caught in a turf war?
(Nilekani refuses to comment.)


So is UIDAI about establishing citizenship or Indian residency? The Standing Committee draft says the scheme has ‘no clarity of purpose’ and is ‘directionless’ because it includes all residents.

The UIDAI’s mandate as per the government notification is to generate and assign unique numbers to residents. The Aadhaar number is not a proof of citizenship.


What about duplication? The Planning Commission wrote to Home Minister P Chidambaram that it wants to avoid duplication of data and expense.
De-duplication is built into the system already. UIDAI has always considered converging the UID and NPR methods and data as top priority.


The logical order of the whole project seems to be back to front. First, the assurance of unique identity, then the fund allocation, then the feasibility study, and now, after Rs 550 crore have been spent, the Bill to govern it. The Standing Committee draft says the UIDAI project was approved in haste.
The UIDAI is an executive authority created by a notification of the Government of India under the aegis of the Planning Commission. The National Identification Authority of India Bill is not a pre-requisite for undertaking the project. It has been proposed to provide a statutory basis for the UIDAI. The project has been approved by the government under due process.


It is also said that the UIDAI’s financial autonomy is improper.
All proposals and funds for the project have been approved by Parliament. We have followed transparent procedures in procurement.


Those already enrolled have been asking: Are the cards going to be issued at all?
Our mandate is to provide unique identity numbers to the residents of India. The Aadhaar number is communicated by a letter through India Post. We did make an effort to explore possibilities of a card for reasons of improving the quality. However, this decision has been kept in abeyance. The UIDAI has no intention of issuing a smart card/biometrics-based card.


Are you sure all the IDs are unique? The UIDAI feasibility study said there could be a 0.0025 percent of biometric duplication, and 15 percent failure. That is 18 trillion possible mistakes!
The UIDAI is using a combination of biometrics (fingerprints and iris scans). We believe that this combination assures a high degree of uniqueness. Exceptions in any technology would be dealt with by a well-laid out exception-handling process.


Shouldn’t we have had privacy laws in place before UID?
The UIDAI collects minimum data from the people. No profiling attributes are collected. We do not share individual data with anyone.

10 reasons why the standing committee is miffed with UID
1. Since the lawmaking is underway, with the Bill still pending, all executive actions of the UID are unethical and in violation
2. The project was approved in haste. No feasibility study was done
3. The system has far-reaching consequences for national security
4. The project has no clarity of purpose and is directionless. Meant initially for BPL families, it has been extended to all residents in India
5. The Empowered Group of Ministers constituted to collate National Population Register (NPR) and UID didn’t take concrete decisions to avoid duplication. Data collection for UID and national ID should have been entrusted to a single authority only
6. It is built on unreliable and untested technology. Despite UIDAI’s adverse observations of error rates of biometrics, it continues to be used
7. If the project does not continue beyond the present number of 200 million enrolments, the whole exercise becomes futile
8. There is lack of coordination and difference of views between various departments. Controversies between the Minister of Home Affairs and the UIDAI remain unresolved, affecting NPR and Aadhaar schemes
9. The national data protection law, which is being drafted by Ministry of Personnel, is a pre-requisite for this ID law that deals with large-scale information from individuals. It will deal with access, misuse, surveillance, profiling, confidentiality, etc
10. The committee, finally, recommends that fresh legislation be drafted.


Q&A Montek Singh Ahluwalia Planning Commission Deputy Chairman


‘The Planning Commission fully supports UID’
PLANNING COMMISSION Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia tells Rohini Mohan that the UID scheme needs solutions, not an outright rejection.


Excerpts From An Interview


Why is the Planning Commission sending mixed signals about UID?
The Planning Commission is fully supporting the UID. At least I am. If there’s anyone who isn’t supporting the commission’s view, it doesn’t matter.


But in a Cabinet note dated 30 August, you had expressed worries about duplication of data.
Yes, I had concerns about duplication between UIDAI and the home ministry’s data, but I also suggested four different solutions to avoid it. The home ministry is not ready to accept those options. From the beginning, NPR and UIDAI were supposed to use each other’s data, but the home ministry has finally taken a position that they will not use UID material. I don’t support this.


But why this change of stance when the UIDAI is already underway? Is it a turf war?
The home ministry’s objective is not the same as the UID. For them, it’s security. They clearly say so in the Cabinet note. What they were supposed to do didn’t involve biometrics, etc. The UID objective is different — it’s about identity, enabling people to access government schemes. The difference is important and they don’t believe the UIDAI fits in this goal. I’m going to present to the Cabinet that we shouldn’t scrap the UID.
Rohini Mohan is a Special Correspondent with Tehelka.
rohini@tehelka.com