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

Sunday, June 23, 2013

3444 - LPG SUBSIDY AND AADHAAR -A 'pilot' that lost direction - India Together


While the government claims that an Aadhaar-linked system for direct transfer of social security benefits and receivables will soon be a reality across India, a local experiment devised around reimbursement of LPG subsidy in Mysore fails to raise hope. Bharat Bhatti reports. 

20 June 2013 - The cash transfer (alias “direct benefits transfer”) juggernaut seems to have started rolling. By next year, we are told, a pan-India platform to transfer subsidies and social security benefits directly to beneficiaries will be functioning across the country. However, lost in the cacophony and fanfare is the fate of the pilot experiments that were initiated in different parts of the country as a precursor to this system. These ‘experiments’ were kicked off supposedly to learn valuable lessons from ground realities, so that the scaling up would be more effective and efficient. However, ground investigations revealed that these experiments were more like ‘show-pieces’ because of a general lack of method in execution and a haste to brand them as ‘success’ sans any objective assessment.

The Kotkasim experiment in Rajasthan is one well-known example of a pilot gone awry, but there are others. Take for instance the case of Mysore, where a pilot scheme for direct cash transfer of the LPG subsidy was launched from January 2012 to December 2012. Briefly, the scheme entails transferring the subsidy (that is, the difference between the price of a subsidised gas cylinder and its market price) directly into the customer’s Aadhaar-enabled bank account. To verify the identity of the customer, biometric authentication is conducted through a hand-held device when the cylinder is delivered. This is to ensure that only legitimate beneficiaries receive the subsidy and to prevent black marketing of gas.

File illustration, Citizen Matters

Until now, there has been no official word about the success or failure of the Mysore pilot. Newspaper reports have been the only source of information about the scale and performance of this scheme which quote that about 77,000 LPG consumers from three different gas agencies - Venus (IOCL), Little (HPCL) and Prasad (BPCL) in Mysore city were chosen for the pilot and were asked to submit Aadhaar numbers and bank account details to the gas agencies. Also, owing to inadequate preparedness and lack of bank accounts, the experiment was restricted only to the doorstep biometric authentication of the customers during delivery cylinders. Even in this respect, no one is sure today how many of these 77,000 customers were actually provided with cylinders through the Aadhaar system. To check the facts for myself and see the ground implementation of the pilot, I spent a few days in Mysore. Brief as it was, this investigation led to some interesting findings.

It is worth mentioning that the scheme appears to be implemented behind a thick veil of secrecy. During the field visit it was strongly felt that the district administration and the gas agencies were trying to stonewall any information sought from them regarding this experiment. For instance, the Director Civil Supplies of Mysore district had no information whatsoever about it, or perhaps he did not want to divulge any information. Similarly, the officials at the gas agencies were not willing to talk about it; nor did the websites of the gas companies have information related to it.

Turning to people’s perceptions of this experiment, a disturbing picture emerges again. There was acute lack of information among people about the scheme and the general perception was that all of this merely entails limiting subsidised cylinders to six. This was evident by the fact that not a single respondent in a random sample of inhabitants of three residential colonies of Mysore (Itkegudu, Nazarbad and Saraswatipuram) had ever heard about it, despite most of them being regular customers of the gas agencies. 

During the field visit it was strongly felt that the district administration and the gas agencies were trying to stonewall any information sought from them regarding this experiment. The Director Civil Supplies of Mysore district had no information about it. Similarly, officials at the gas agencies were not willing to talk about it. - See more at: http://www.indiatogether.org/2013/jun/eco-aadhaar.htm#sthash.YKvscHQW.dpuf

Similarly, the people gathered at the gas agencies to submit their Aadhaar numbers and other documents seemed to only have a vague idea that without Aadhaar numbers they would not be entitled to subsidised cylinders. Even they did not have a clue about the authentication process at the time of delivery. Only one person from Saraswatipuram colony claimed that his wife had used the authentication system and that she was fine with it. Thus it seems evident that the scale of operation of the scheme was very limited making it difficult to conclude about the success or failure of the scheme.

The Mysore experiment seems a little bizarre. However, as mentioned earlier, it is not unique. In fact, the fate of the Mysore experiment seems quite similar to that of other pilot experiments of this kind. For instance in Ratu (Jharkhand), where Aadhaar-enabled payment system for MGNREGA wages was declared a ‘success’ even though exclusion errors like fingerprint authentication and connectivity issues were yet to be sorted out. Similarly, the direct cash transfer experiment of Kerosene subsidy in Kotkasim (Rajasthan) aimed at eliminating ghost beneficiaries led to a drastic fall in the kerosene sale through the PDS due to exclusion of legitimate buyers.

Some interesting parallels could be drawn among all these instances of so-called ‘proof of concept’. Firstly, it appears that these pilots were used (or sought to be used) to rationalise things that were decided in advance, and thus, essentially reduced to ‘showpieces’. Often they were projected as a ‘success’ even when they were nowhere close to it, especially in terms of effectiveness and equity criteria. Instead of admitting failure or hurdles, and learning valuable lessons from them, the administration kept harping on these supposed successes.

Further, very little information regarding these experiments was given to all concerned people. Without sufficient information among the people, it is difficult to solicit their cooperation. Last but not least, these experiments do not seem to involve any learning process, which ought to be the main purpose of a ‘pilot’. In the absence of objective assessment and rectification of mistakes, the very purpose of launching pilot experiments is defeated.

Bharat Bhatti
20 June 2013
Bharat Bhatti is doing his Masters in Development Studies from Ambedkar University, Delhi.
- See more at: http://www.indiatogether.org/2013/jun/eco-aadhaar.htm#sthash.YKvscHQW.dpuf