AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 4664 - Supreme Court asks Centre not to make Aadhaar cards mandatory

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, September 29, 2013

4664 - Supreme Court asks Centre not to make Aadhaar cards mandatory - India Today

Supreme Court asks Centre not to make Aadhaar cards mandatory

MAIL TODAY BUREAU | MAIL TODAY | NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 24, 2013 | UPDATED 13:02 IST

Dealing a huge blow to the Centre's ambitious scheme to link essential services with the Aadhaar card, the Supreme Court on Monday asked the Centre not to make it mandatory for availing of government benefits and services.

Pointing at the shortcomings of the Aadhaar scheme rolled out by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI, a Bench headed by Justice B.S. Chauhan said UID number should not be necessary for essential services such as gas connections, vehicle registration, scholarships, marriage registration, salaries and provident fund.

The court also said the Aadhaar cards should not be issued to illegal immigrants as it would legitimise their stay in the country. There have been reports of a huge number of Bangladeshi illegal immigrants being issued Aadhaar cards.

Big blow

The court order could deal a blow to the Centre's 'gamechanging' Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT) scheme - through which it transfers welfare payments directly to the Aadhaarlinked bank accounts of beneficiaries - at a time when the Congress is hoping to cash in on the project for electoral gains.

The apex court was hearing a batch of petitions against the decisions of some states to make Aadhaar cards compulsory for availing various facilities, including Provident Fund disbursals and marriage and property registrations.

Alleging political gains, senior counsel Anil Divan told the bench of Justices Chauhan and S.A. Bobde that indiscriminate issuance of Aadhaar numbers to all residents, including illegal migrants, created a serious threat to national security.

Stay

Linking the Aadhaar number to getting benefits of welfare schemes under the Food Security Bill, cooking gas subsidy, PF and direct benefit transfer made it mandatory in nature, Divan, representing petitioner and former Karnataka High Court judge K.S. Puttaswamy, said. The petitioner has sought a stay on the implementation of the scheme.

Those opting for Aadhaar are required to give personal information including biometrics, iris and fingerprints, which infringes the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21, Divan said. The bench was also informed that there were no safeguard to protect the personal information and no provision for penalties if it comes to public domain.

Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran said Aadhaar card was purely voluntary and there was no need for interim directions. The Centre has said the consent of an individual is indispensable for Aadhaar.