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

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

4727 - Aadhaar on shaky foundation - Deccan Herald

Ajith Athrady , Sep 29, 2013 :


SC ruling, a setback for the Centre, may force it to change controversial programme’s guidelines.

Ever since the launch of Aadhaar, the project to give 12 digit unique identification number for every individual has constantly been under question. The latest one is the Supreme Court interim order which has held  that Aadhaar cannot be made compulsory for any public benefits or schemes and that it can only be issued to those who can prove their Indian citizenship.

 The ruling came at a time when the United Progressive Alliance-II was  stepping up its efforts to roll out subsidy schemes based on Aadhaar across the country. By making Aadhaar the basis for all its welfare schemes in the long run, the Congress-led government had hoped to reach out to the poor through direct benefit transfer (DBT) schemes just ahead of elections.


The court’s observations not only put the ‘game-changing’ uses of Aadhaar number in limbo but also questions the government’s intent of spending crores of rupees to distribute numbers, when the programme lacks legislative strength.

The court passed its order after taking serious note of the points mentioned in the petition that the government chose to set up the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to roll out Aadhaar numbers through an executive order with no discussion in Parliament and that it impinged on the right to privacy of individuals.

There is no assurance of protection of confidentiality of the biometric data collected by private agencies. Moreover, non-citizens would get benefits such as subsidy transfers while illegal immigrants will get legitimised.

There is no way the government can verify the nationality of an individual apart from relying on the documents he or she submits.

 The court order virtually exposed the UPA government’s lack of clarity  towards its ambitious scheme. It is almost five years since UIDAI was notified in January 2009 by the UPA-I Government, and till now, the Centre has been unable to articulate a clear vision of what it wants to do in the form of sound legislation.

An attempt was made in December, 2010 to provide legislative frame work for the UIDAI. It failed as a Parliamentary Standing Committee rejected it and asked the government to draft fresh legislation to make it robust. The government, instead of redrafting the legislation, focused on continuing the programme through the existing executive order.

It seems the mandarins of the ruling dispensation are totally confused over the UIDAI programme. In July, minister of state for planning Rajeev Shukla, had informed Parliament that "Aadhaar card is not mandatory to avail subsidised facilities being offered by the government like LPG cylinders, admission in private aided schools, opening a savings account etc."

 However, in the same breath, several departments of the Union Government as well as many state governments, mostly Congress-ruled, make it mandatory to get Aadhaar number to avail benefit. For instance, in Delhi, Adhaar number is mandatory at the sub-registrar’s office including for marriage certificates while in some states, having the unique number is a must to obtain ration cards.

While several states attach a number of welfare schemes to Aadhaar- linked bank accounts, the Union Ministry of Petroleum said recently said it will extend the cash transfer on LPG subsidy to 235 districts by January 1, 2014, from the current 55. A total of 34 schemes under different ministries fall under DBT scheme.

The turf war between different ministries on UIDAI and National Population Registry (NPR) has also hit the ambitious programme hard. While a slew of ministries led by the home ministry back the NPR, which is issuing citizenship card, some others support Adhaaar, led by Planning Commission.

The country has been divided into two to accommodate both. In 18 states, the UIDAI has been asked to dish out Aadhaar while the remaining states will be covered under the NPR. However, those enrolling for the UIDAI have to enroll themselves for the NPR too, while those covered under the NPR do need Aadhaar. The Government till now has no answer why this duplication in enrollment.

Despite the opposition from intelligentsia on grounds of privacy, transferring the benefit through Aadhaar-linked bank account is expected to plug leakages, say its supporters. The government still claims that Aadhaar is a project that will empower hundreds of millions of poor Indians to acquire proof of identity and bring them under the formal financial system.

Gopal Krishna, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties says the states which have signed the MoU with UIDAI should cancel them following the Supreme Court ruling and stop enrolling public. As there is no legislation backing the programme, the scheme should be scrapped till its purpose is known, he says.

It's not clear what holds for Aadhaar now. The UIDAI officials are not answering any queries on the court order. Though Oil Minister M Veerappa Moily claimed that the government would appeal to the Supreme Court against its order, experts says say unless the government passes a strong legislation to give some teeth to Aadhaar, the prospect of it facing wrath from the court is bright.

If the interim order is repeated in the final order, the organisation’s  future will hang in balance. If the government wants to make Aadhaar mandatory, it will have to either promulgate an Ordinance or get the UIDAI Bill passed in Parliament. If the scheme stays voluntary, Aadhaar will be just remain one more form of ID among a dozen others.