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

Monday, September 30, 2013

4709 - No Aadhaar in Aadhaar cards - Free Press Journal India,

September 25, 2013 12:01:00 AM

The Supreme Court order on Monday ruling out the Aadhaar card as mandatory for availing various government services has not come a day too soon. For, the way the scheme was conceived and implemented, it had left a lot to be desired. 

Vast amounts of taxpayer money were wasted on a scheme whose usefulness is still in question. Basically, providing all comers a unique identity number, or Aadhaar card, without in anyway verifying fundamental details, such as the person’s nationality, address, name, etc., was bound to prove problematic. Besides, the scheme lacked parliamentary approval, the government rushing to spend thousands of crores on a mere executive order. 

This could have been condoned if such a major expenditure was undertaken on a scheme which promised larger benefits to the society. That they still went ahead with Nandan Nilekani’s pet idea, even though the then Union Home Minister P Chidambaram had very serious reservations, reveals the confusion in the higher echelons of the government. 

Chidambaram had blocked the roll-off of Aadhaar on the very sound ground that the home ministry’s National Population Register aimed to achieve virtually the same objectives. The public scrap between Nilekani and Chidambaram had threatened to jeopardise Aadhaar even before its roll-out. But the prime minister intervened to effect a compromise. While Aadhaar was assigned major urban centres, the NPR was allocated the rest of the country. There was no doubt that the Aadhaar roll-out owed more to the fact that Nilekani had left his high perch at the IT major Infosys to implement the Aadhaar scheme, and no dispassionate analysis of its costs and benefits. 

Equally, the government seemed in a hurry to garner glory by investing the Aadhaar scheme with a host of yet-to-be-verified benefits. The provision of various benefits and services like subsidised gas cylinders, motor registration, scholarships, provident fund, salaries, etc. was crucially sought to be linked to Aadhaar cards. 

Further, in the name of financial inclusion, banks were ordered to open accounts on the basis of Aadhaar cards and do away with the mandatory `know-your-customer’ norms. Public sector banks were in a funk, but felt obliged to follow the orders since the government was deadset on exploiting the scheme for electoral purposes. 

The Direct Benefit Transfer scheme received a huge PR build-up before roll-out. Otherwise knowledgeable ministers like Chidambaram called the DBT a `game-changer’, little realising that the foundation it was based on, namely, the Aadhaar card, was shaky. It was sheer wastage of taxpayer funds that the Aadhaar and NPR schemes were duplicated in large parts of the country, including the national capital. 

The shoddiness of the government was not limited to the misuse of Aadhaar cards by illegal immigrants for acquiring even voter cards or to draw all the benefits available to bona fide Indian citizens. Even the privacy concerns of citizens were not addressed when the scheme was rolled-out on an executive order, without due parliamentary approval. 

Bestowing primacy to Aadhaar cards for the provision of various services, as if that in itself would plug leaks of government funds and improve their implementation was one thing; even those tasks which did not require these cards were brought into its ambit. For instance, in Maharashtra, the Aadhaar card was made necessary for marriage registration.

In its order on a PIL, Justices B S Chauhan and S A Bobde, while granting an interim stay on the use of Aadhaar numbers for various government services, remitted the matter to a Constitution Bench. 

In a brief order, the court directed the Unique Authority of India to “verify whether the applicant is entitled to the card under the law and should not issue it to illegal immigrants.” How the authority will do it is unclear, since it lacks the wherewithal to undertake such background checks of applicants. The Aadhaar cards would lack credibility even for bona fide Indian citizens, unless there was some guarantee that the details mentioned had been cross-checked by an official agency. Or, at least, the detection of false details by applicants was made punishable under the law. 

Without a ring of credibility, its utility as an identity number of a bona fide Indian citizen would remain suspect. Since thousands of crores of public money have been wasted, maybe a via media can be found to salvage the well-intentioned but hastily implemented scheme.