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, June 27, 2014

5612 - House approves effort to limit NSA searches of U.S. data


The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to limit the National Security Agency’s ability to search U.S. records, after a similar provision was stripped out of a bill intended to rein in the agency.

The House, by a 293-123 vote late Thursday, approved a bipartisan proposal to limit the NSA’s surveillance programs by requiring the agency to get a court-ordered warrant to search U.S records in its possession.

The proposal, offered as an amendment to a Department of Defense funding bill, would close the so-called “backdoor search” loophole in the FISA Amendments Act, a law allowing NSA surveillance of overseas communications. The final vote on the defense bill is expected Friday, with the bill next moving to the Senate if it passes the House.

The FISA Amendments Act authorizes overseas surveillance of online and telephone communications and prohibits the agency from intentionally targeting U.S. residents. But the law does not prohibit the agency from querying U.S. communications inadvertently collected under the foreign surveillance program.
Intelligence officials have acknowledged in recent months they do conduct warrantless searches of U.S. records under the program, leading to protests from civil rights and privacy groups.

““Yes, we need to protect our country, but we also need to honor our Constitution.”

The NSA amendment, offered by a group of representatives including Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat, would also prohibit the NSA or other U.S. agencies from using any funds to request or require a company to build a back door into any product or service in order to allow surveillance. News reports based on leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden have suggested the agency has approached tech companies about building back doors into products.

The warrantless search of U.S. records violates the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable searches, Massie said on the House floor. “The American people are sick of being spied on,” he said.

The warrant search provision was originally part of the USA Freedom Act, a bill aimed at limiting the NSA’s bulk collection of U.S. phone records, but negotiators stripped out the provision under pressure from President Barack Obama’s administration in the daysbefore the House passed the bill in late May.

The amendment drew support from several liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. The amendment’s point was, “yes, we need to protect our country, but we also need to honor our Constitution,” Lofgren said.

Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen, a New Jersey Republican and chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, opposed the amendment, saying it didn’t relate to the defense funding bill it was added to. “There’s nothing in this amendment about funding,” he said. “The goal is to change policy.”

The USA Freedom Act contained “carefully crafted reforms” negotiated between House leaders and intelligence officials, and the Massie amendment would upset a “closely negotiated” compromise, said Representative Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. The USA Freedom Act already limits what the NSA can do with the U.S. data it collects, he said.

The amendment would “make our country less safe,” added Representative Dutch Ruppersberger from Maryland, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Earlier on Thursday, the House, by voice vote, approved an amendment to the defense funding bill that prohibits the NSA from engaging in any activities that undermine encryption standards developed by the National Institute for Standards and Technology. In late 2013, news organizations reported that the NSA had tampered with NIST’s process of choosing encryption algorithms.


Representative Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat and author of the amendment, said the provision will help restore faith in NIST’s standards-setting process.