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, December 28, 2011

2148 - After Parl. panel’s rejection of UID bill, activists want it to be stopped- Two Circles

Submitted by admin3 on 27 December 2011 - 8:48pm

By Md. Ali, TwoCircles.net,
New Delhi: A panel of eminent citizens, which includes jurists like Usha Ramanathan and Deep Joshi member of the National Advisory Council (NAC) among others, has called for the Unique Identification Number (UID) card project to be immediately stopped after the Parliamentary Standing Committee rejected the National Identification Authority of India (NIDAI) Bill, 2010. They also asked the government to also start a CBI enquiry and CAG audit of the scheme.

In its report which was presented to the Parliament on December13, 2011, the Parliamentary Standing Committee asked the government to stop the UID project. Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) is leading this project to issue UID cards to all the Indians

The Standing Committee which rejected the biometrics data based identification of Indians said that the UID project is “directionless” and has been “conceptualized with no clarity of purpose.” The Committee found the biometric technology ‘uncertain’ and ‘untested.’ There were several other reasons why the committee rejected the UID project. For instance, the Committee also noted that the government has “admitted that no committee has been constituted to study the financial implication of the UID scheme; and 9b0 comparative costs of the aadhar number (UID number) and various existing ID documents are also not available.”

Unique Identification Number later renamed as Aadhaar number, is an initiative of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) of the Indian government to create a unique ID for every Indian resident. Aadhaar is a 12-digit unique identification (UID) number, stored in a centralised database and linked to the basic demographics and biometric information – photograph, ten fingerprints and iris – of each individual.

Several leading activists have been opposing the UID card because of several serious reasons. For instance the UID project seeks to gather data of all the citizens of India at such a huge scale when there is no data protection law in place in the country. More importantly there have been several cases where the data collectors of the UID cards are anti-social elements, who have reportedly sold the data to local stakeholders.

Activists have been opposing the UID scheme also because it has the potential to become a tool for ‘exclusion’ particularly in the case of date misuse. For instance, if the data gets leaked, it can be misused to identify and target a particular group like religious or linguistic minorities. For instance in case of any communal riot, there are apprehensions that the data can be misused to identify and target a minority group.

Even though the government had recognized the need for a law to deal with security and confidentiality of information, imposition of obligation of disclosure of information in certain cases, impersonation at the time of enrolment, investigation of acts which constitute offenses and unauthorized disclosure of information, the Unique Identification (UID) project was allowed to march on without any such protection being put in place. This disdain for the law has been characterized by the Standing Committee as ‘unethical and violative of the Parliament’s prerogatives.’

That’s why the Standing Committee also noted that while the UIDAI was constituted on January 28, 2009 without parliamentary approval, and the UID numbers were began to be rolled out in September 2010, the Detailed project Report of the UID Scheme was done much later in April 2011.
The Parliamentary panel also noted that the government had no business going ahead with the UID cards when it didn’t have the legal as well as parliamentary mandate to do that, a fact which Chief Ministers of several states highlighted in their letters written to the Prime Minster Dr. Manmohan Singh.

Importantly according to the government and Nandan Nilekani, who is heading the UID project, the UID card promises to give the poor their identity, it is a tool for profiling the beneficiary in the PDS, streamlining payments to be made under the MGNREGS and enabling the achievement of targets under the Right to Education or any such government scheme. Service delivery is what it guarantees. But serious doubts have been raised about its being able to rationalise the PDS.

Another aspect being voiced in favor of the UID is its efficacy in streamlining direct cash transfer to the poor by effectively segmenting the poor and the needy. Nilekani has also been saying that the UID card will make all the other cards irrelevant and the citizens of India won’t have to be concerned about other cards. But leading activists and the entire civil society has been saying that there are several other issues like safety and security of the data and thereby the citizens of India among others which are too important to be ignored. At present Indian citizens have 15 cards including ration card, voter ID card, Permanent Account Number (PAN) card.

But the Parliamentary Standing Committee and leading activists of the country like Aruna Roy and Jean Derez, want the project to be put on hold till a feasibility was done, a cost; benefit analysis undertaken, a law of privacy put in place, and various concerns of surveillance, tracking profiling, tagging and convergance of data be addressed. The Standing Committee asked the government that the project can’t carry on till all of the above mentioned issues are sorted out.
Interestingly the Parliamentary Committee also accepted the concerns expressed by the activists that the UID project authorities should acknowledge that several developed countries like UK, USA, China, Australia, and the Philippines have abandoned identity schemes like UIDAI. For instance studies on identity scheme were done in UK but were later withdrawn in May 2010 because of the reasons ranging from “(a) the huge cost involved and possible cost overturns (b) too complex (c) untested, reliable and unsafe technology (d) possibility of risks to the safety and security of the citizens….”