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, January 19, 2014

5040 - Age of consent is a myth: Supreme Court on 'mandatory' Aadhaar cards- India Today

Age of consent is a myth: Supreme Court on 'mandatory' Aadhaar cards

HARISH V. NAIR   |   MAIL TODAY  |   NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 27, 2013 | UPDATED 08:49 IST

The Supreme Court, while hearing PILs against "mandatory" Aadhaar cards on Tuesday, mocked an argument that it was wrong to force children to part with personal details before they attain the age of consent.

"What consent are you talking about? Do you know 69 per cent girls in India are married off before the age of 18 without their consent and 30 per cent are made child labourers without their consent?" Justice B.S. Chauhan asked a lawyer, appearing for one of the petitioners, who pointed out that children in Kerala are forced to give their personal details as Aadhaar card is a mandatory requisite for admission to government schools.

"For such children rice, roti and dal is more important than consent for Aadhaar cards. Do you know majority of these students attend school because of mid-day meal? What is the quality of education? More than teaching, the teachers are involved in cooking the mid-day meal. Mr. lawyer, you are being impractical and uncalculative," Justice Chauhan said.

The bench was hearing a batch of petitions on the ground that Aadhaar cards violates and transgresses individual rights of citizens. The court asked states and union territories to respond to the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of an Aadhaar card and it being made mandatory for getting benefits under the government's social welfare schemes.

The apex court, in its interim order, had said that Aadhaar card should not be made mandatory for people to avail government services. The Centre, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and three oil PSUs - IOCL, BPCL and HPCL - had later on moved the Supreme Court seeking modification of its earlier order that Aadhaar card is not mandatory and no person should suffer to get the benefits of government schemes.

The petitioners, including former High Court Judge K. Puttaswamy, are seeking to restrain the Centre and the UIDAI from issuing Aadhaar cards by way of an executive order of January 28, 2009. "It violates the right to privacy of individuals by collecting personal information which can be misused", senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for one of the petitioners, contended.

He submitted data for Unique identification number being collected by private individuals which presents a grave risk to the privacy of citizens.


CLICK ON TITLE TO SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE - Posted by
Labels: ,