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, October 13, 2013

4799 - UPA ready for Aadhaar battle on two flanks - The Hindu

NEW DELHI, October 8, 2013
Updated: October 9, 2013 10:48 IST


NITIN SETHI

The Union Cabinet approved the bill it had earlier sent to Parliament with just a few amendments

On Aadhaar, the UPA has decided to take on the Supreme Court as well as the Opposition. The government on Tuesday defended Aadhaar before the Supreme Court asking for relief from the interim orders. It has decided to argue that the judiciary has encroached upon its executive decision-making space with the order. In parallel, the Union Cabinet cleared the National Identification Authority of India Bill on Tuesday, rejecting all key reservations of the Parliament Standing Committee which had studied the original 2010 version of the bill.

The standing committee had made scathing comments on the bill as well as the functioning of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) without a parliamentary mandate.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court decided not to alter its interim orders on Aadhaar as pleaded by the government and oil PSUs. The order had put critical restrictions against the use and distribution of the unique identity numbers. But the government has prepared a brief to fight it out aggressively in the court claiming that the court orders are impinging on the powers of the executive, which includes the right to make the identity numbers mandatory for the government’s targeted social schemes, if it so wishes.

In a move that is designed to also provide more solid grounds for the government to continue with its policy on Aadhaar, the Union Cabinet approved the bill it had earlier sent to Parliament with just a few amendments even as it endorsed the position that the current model, policy and processes of the UID are foolproof, adequate and legally sound.

If the two-pronged attack works and the government is able to get a nod for the bill in the winter session of Parliament, it could secure a legal mandate of the UIDAI that has been lacking so far and quell dissent and litigation.

With the court agreeing to hold an early final hearing in the case on October 22, the government plans to make the case that there is no credible proof of a wide-scale denial of benefits to people without Aadhaar numbers. The government will claim there are only some aberrations at worst and that the government is ensuring that those without cards do not get left out while the distribution of cards is not complete. At the same time the government will defend its right to make the cards mandatory for its social security schemes. It will equate the Aadhaar card to a ration card or a driving license arguing that the government can choose what measures it takes to identify beneficiaries. It will distinguish between government schemes and other programmes or services that do not require to be targeted, such as opening of bank accounts or telephone connections.

It will also argue in detail that it is not the UIDAI’s job to identify illegal migrants and block any chances of these individuals of securing Aadhaar cards. It will claim that work is done by the Ministry of Home Affairs and Aadhaar will act as proof of identity and residence. Again its line of argument would be that there may be stray cases and aberrations but there is no hard proof of systematic leakage in their ‘robust’ verification methods.

With the UPA still keen to push the cash transfer scheme through Aadhaar, calling it Direct Benefit Transfer, the government also has taken the position that LPG connections are not linked to the UID cards.

While clearing the bill in the cabinet too the UPA has decided to reinforce its power to make the aadhaar cards mandatory when it so desires. It has rejected the Parliamentary Standing Committee’s observations on the matter along with all other recommendations. The background note for the cabinet on the bill records the government’s assertion that once the UIDAI programme is fully rolled out it “would only be logical to make it a necessary condition for availing public benefits and services. Without this linkage, the total investment in the UIDAI project would be infructuous.”

The amendments the cabinet affirmed on Tuesday include an explicit mention right up front in the title of the bill that the UID shall act as proof of identity and residence proof.

Through a second amendment the bill made provision for people to use the identity number through electronic channels as well for confirming identity and residence.

Another amendment permits the UIDAI to share data with authorities without explicit consent of those holding the aadhaar numbers if the Central government so mandates it under specific directions or if another law requires data sharing. The government has contended that issues of data leakage can be handled under general laws such as the Information Technology Act, 2010.
There are several other amendments but most of them are technical and legal corrections and do not alter the provisions substantially.

In fact the government has summarily rejected all the objections of the standing committee. It has backed the UID system as being robust against criticism that it did not account for leakages.

Defending its operations even as the bill remained pending in the Parliament, the government has cited a legal opinion of the Attorney General to claim that UIDAI could work through executive orders without falling foul of the Constitution.