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

Friday, February 28, 2014

5233 - Piggybacking on Aadhaar, banks can reach financial inclusion target by May

Piggybacking on Aadhaar, banks can reach financial inclusion target by May

Arun S , Arup Roychoudhury | Updated: Feb 24 2014, 14:04 IST

SUMMARY
If a bank achieves 40% today on the basis of its current disbursement, it will achieve 50% adjusted PSL target.

The RBI panel report on financial inclusion has attracted criticism from bankers and financial sector experts for its “unrealistic” financial inclusion and priority sector lending (PSL) targets. Many have also questioned the viability of ‘payment banks’, a system designed to help banks achieve financial inclusion targets. In an interview to FE’s Arun S and Arup Roychoudhury, the RBI Central Board member and chair of the Committee on Comprehensive Financial Services for Small Businesses and Low-Income Households, Nachiket Mor defended the panel’s recommendations and said the targets are indeed achievable. Edited excerpts:

Are you confident that banks, which are now finding it tough to meet the PSL target of 40% of adjusted net bank credit (ANBC), can achieve the 'adjusted PSL target of 50%' that the report suggests?

The (PSL) target is still 40% of ANBC. The adjusted number is along with weightages. If a bank achieves 40% today on the basis of its current disbursement, it will achieve 50% adjusted PSL target. If we had kept it at 40% and added weights, it would have amounted to a sharp reduction in PSL requirement.
People are commenting on the issue somewhat casually. They need to look at the actual computation method mentioned in the report. At the end of the day, these percentages are a matter of debate. The core issue is does one think specialization is a good idea or not? In the report, sectors and districts are given weightages on the basis of the difficulties in lending to them. The more difficult ones get a higher weightage and the less difficult ones get a lower weightage. A bank will have to achieve an adjusted PSL value of 50% by following the weightages.
Those lending to a difficult sector in a difficult-to-reach district can benefit from a multiplier value based on the specific district and sector. That's the core idea. The RBI has to decide exactly what that weight should be. We have given some regional weights. Some banks say “I don’t disburse in those areas.” The reality is that we have done this calculation and it is in the report. If you disburse your loans today at 40%, you will get to 50 points. There is no increase in the target.

The report has set a target of January 1, 2016 for each Indian resident, aged above 18, to have an individual, full-service and safe electronic bank account. Do you seriously think this is achievable? If so, what is the rate at which banks have to open accounts to ensure that they reach this target?
If you follow the traditional methods of doing this, 2016 is too ambitious a target. In fact, you may need another 20 years. The idea hidden in the report is that you have to use other strategies to get to the target. In State Bank of India alone, in the last two or three years, they have opened 200 million accounts. I learnt about this recently from SBI chairperson Arundhati Bhattacharya. A single bank is opening such a large number of accounts using agents, and not using their branches.

The point we (the panel) are making is that you have to use new approaches to get to those targets. These include agents, PPIs (prepaid instrument issuer) or payment banks and post offices. These are people who are able to move at a different pace and have a different economic structure. If you piggyback on the Aadhaar process, opening a bank account can be done much faster. There are already one billion mobile connections. Tomorrow you (Aadhaar-holder) can get an SMS and you can have a billion bank accounts.

The point being made is, if you follow traditional approaches of opening up branches and identifying customers, even four years is not enough. It is okay to say shift the target from 2016 to 2018. But there is no logic to that number then. We put our recommendations on the basis of our thinking that the Aadhaar process will complete the enrollment, because if you are piggybacking on Aadhaar, then the process will get done by 2016 or even earlier. Aadhaar will cross 70 crore card-holders by May this year. That itself gives you nearly 100% coverage in terms of bank accounts.

There is criticism that the payment banks model is not viable given the proposed norms, including prohibition on them extending credit, even as they will be required to comply with all other RBI guidelines relevant for banks including the Cash Reserve Ratio. They have to also deposit the balance proceeds in approved Statutory Liquidity Ratio securities with a duration of no more than three months and won’t be permitted to assume any credit risks. They will also be restricted to holding a maximum balance of Rs 50,000 per customer. Do you think investors are convinced about the viability of payment banks given the stringent norms?

In fact, ‘payment banking’ is the only profitable part of banking. If you take it away, then banking is not a profitable business. So how can you simultaneously say that it is the most profitable part of banking but it is not viable? If you look at today's PPIs, including Airtel Money, they seem to be doing okay, even though they are not growing. Worldwide there are many institutions that are just doing payments, and that too very competitively. You have to think about what process you have to choose. But if you are going to set up branches and then follow the traditional model, you may not achieve the (financial inclusion) target. In that case, don't set up a payment bank. You have to use alternate mechanisms to get there. SBI uses the agents' route, instead of branches.

Will the final norms be diluted, considering the criticism?
The committee has made recommendations, but I don't know if the RBI will accept those.

When will the guidelines be out?
I can’t say. It could be tomorrow, or it could be 20 years from now. Sooner they come out with the guidelines, the better. Fundamentally, we have not suggested any new ideas in the report. All ideas, including PPIs, business correspondents and cooperative banks, are already on the ground. We have simply asked how we can clean them up, strengthen them and make them more effective.