NEW DELHI, February 2, 2015
Updated: February 2, 2015 20:28 IST
KRISHNADAS RAJAGOPAL
The Supreme Court sought a clarification on the Union Government's current position on the issue.
The Supreme Court on Monday asked the government to look into a public interest petition contending that the Aadhaar scheme is “laden with fraud” and a danger not only to the citizen's privacy and dignity, but also to his “right to protect self-information”.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India H.L. Dattu summoned Solicitor-General Ranjit Kumar to the courtroom and sought a clarification on the government's current position on the issue.
“We heard the government itself is having second thoughts,” Chief Justice Dattu orally observed. Mr. Kumar sought time to study the petition and come back with an answer.
The Bench scheduled the case for hearing on February 13, but did not issue formal notice to the government.
The hearing came on a petition filed by Bangalore-resident and social activist, Mathew Thomas, demanding how the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), “which is not even a statutory body rolled out Unique ID (UID) scheme called “Aadhaar” Scheme, for collection of personal data of residents of India”.
Mr. Thomas, represented by senior advocate Gopal Subramanium and advocate Aishwarya Bhati, pointed that various governmental bodies have made availing essential services as well as withdrawal of salary contingent upon possession of Aadhaar card.
“It is not mandatory, but yes, there is some insistence,” Chief Justice Dattu orally observed at this juncture.
“To ask anybody information, you should have authority by law. You should have a credible structure,” Mr. Subramanium continued. He argued that enlisting citizens in the Aadhaar scheme is not “exactly a government activity, but outsourced to private contractors”.
“On the surface it (Aadhaar) is a simple document of identity, but it has linkages by means of iris scans and biometric details. God forbid if identities are exchanged or mistaken. the Executive's scheme involves private partners. Who are these private partners?” Mr. Subramanium submitted.
Submitting how the ordinary man is now prone to the perils of identity fraud, Mr. Subramanium said the “Sovereign State also has the duty to protect its citizens, to protect his identity, his personal information against possible misuse”.
In this connection, the petition also sought the quashing of Section 14-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 on the ground that “it does not prescribe to what extent private information of citizens shall be required and leaves it to the discretion of Executive”.
Keywords: Supreme Court, Aadhaar, right to protect self-information, Aadhaar PIL