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

4710 - Aadhaar stalled by S. G. VOMBATKERE - The Hindu

September 25, 2013


The interim order on not issuing the cards to undocumented migrants will come in the way of enrolling the poor

The Supreme Court issued an interim order on September 23, 2013, on a public interest litigation challenging certain aspects of the UID Aadhaar project. As reported by the media, the interim order brings out two main points: (1) Aadhaar enrolment of immigrants living in India without proper papers should not be done, and (2) Central and State governments must not deny essential services and benefits solely on the basis of non-enrolment in the project.

The introducer
The first point concerns the Aadhaar system itself. An Aadhaar applicant needs to provide proof of identity (including age) and address using one of several approved documents, such as an electoral photo identity card or passport, before his/her biometrics are captured. But very poor people, for example pavement dwellers, may have no identity document with proof of age, and certainly no address. However, the Aadhaar system caters to such people with the Registrar (State government) notifying a trained introducer who, in effect, contacts the enrolment centre staff, vouching for the person who states that he is Mr. X of so-and-so address is indeed Mr. X of that address.

Thus, the biometrics captured are shown to belong to Mr. X with those details. In practice, the introducer may know only a fraction of the people without such documents who apply for the Aadhaar card by sight or acquaintance, and he/she could unwittingly introduce an immigrant without proper documentation. Even if the introducer knows Mr. X by sight or acquaintance, he has really no means to know whether he is a citizen or a legal resident. The apex court’s order that immigrants without proper documentation must not be enrolled effectively puts introducers “out-of-business,” and thus the poor who have no documents cannot be enrolled. Clearly, the Aadhaar project has not foreseen the risk of immigrants without proper documentation getting themselves enrolled, with attendant security risks.

Benefits
The second point concerns benefits, since the court has said “the Centre and State governments must not insist on Aadhar cards from citizens before providing them essential services.” Thus, for example, oil companies will need to supply LPG cylinders by receiving the subsidised cost at delivery for customers who are not Aadhaar-enrolled, and Public Distribution System ration shops will need to provide rations to entitled persons on the basis of valid ration cards.

The UIDAI may appeal against the apex court’s order especially since Rs.50,000 crore has been spent. Meanwhile, the interim order requires the Central and State governments to provide essential services and benefits to the public without insisting on Aadhaar enrolment.

(Major General S.G. Vombatkere, who retired as Additional Director General, Discipline & Vigilance in Army HQ, New Delhi, writes on strategic and development-related issues.)