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

Thursday, March 20, 2014

5325 - Stop Aadhaar data use to probe crime: UIDAI to SC - Indian Express


Written by Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | March 19, 2014

Even AS the Supreme Court is seized of a bunch of petitions challenging the validity of the Aadhaar card, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has rushed to the SC against an order of the Bombay High Court that seeks to examine if its biometric database can be used in criminal investigation. 

The latest controversy involving a flagship programme of the UPA government has its roots in the order of a Goa court asking the UIDAI to give the CBI biometrics of all residents enrolled with Aadhaar in the state to help solve the gang rape of a seven-year-old girl as the database — which includes recording of fingerprints, iris and facial images of applicants — is supposed to be devoid of duplication and tamper-proof.

The girl was raped in a school in Goa’s Vasco city 14 months back and the case is yet to be cracked. However, there were some chance fingerprints recovered from the scene of crime and the magistrate thought UIDAI could match these fingerprints with its database to help ascertain the identities of the assailants.

Aggrieved by this order, the UIDAI moved Bombay High Court and claimed validation of the magistrate’s order will open the floodgates of such directives by other courts as well other authorities.

The high court noted that the UIDAI has agreed to test the competence of its database in comparing the chance fingerprints with its biometric record. The high court also asked the director general of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory to examine the technological capabilities of the UIDAI database.

Terming the high court’s order as “erroneous,” the UIDAI has petitioned the Supreme Court that the UIDAI system has been developed “for civilian use and for non-forensic purposes”.

Even as the UIDAI describes its biometric technology as one of the best in the world, it pointed out that there was a 0.057 per cent occurrence of false identification. Therefore, the the implications of the False Positive Identification Rate of 0.057 per cent when applied in the UIDAI database of 60 crore residents, will imply false matches of lakh of residents, according the authority.

“This means any such random search, which was now being demanded by the Respondent No.1 (CBI), even if implemented in the current system, would put lakhs of innocent people under the scanner,” said its petition, besides saying such a precedent could lead to a plethora of similar requests for assistance in criminal investigation.

The UIDAI also asserted that sharing information with other agencies would violate a person’s right to privacy since the current data-sharing policy and guidelines clearly provides that biometric data cannot be shared without the consent of the resident.

“Building a system that can search using latent fingerprints, quite like criminal database searches, is not within the constitutional and legal mandate and scope of UIDAI and fundamentally against the core reason residents have provided their data voluntarily to UIDAI,” it maintained.

The UIDAI added that the questions relating to privacy was also a subject matter of the bunch of PILs currently being adjudicated by the SC and hence no order could be passed to share information of the applicants in the meantime.

The SC is hearing a bunch of petitions that have challenged the validity of the Aadhaar card in absence of a pertinent legislation and has also disputed its compulsory nature. By an interim last September, the apex court restricted all authorities from denying a benefit or service to any citizen of India for want of the Aadhaar card.

The SC will hear the UIDAI petition on March 24.