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, April 17, 2015

7790 - DC debate: Should people give up LPG subsidy? - Deccan Chronicle

DC | March 29, 2015, 08.03 am IST

Cut taxes, not LPG subsidy
The appeal made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi — for people to give up LPG subsidy voluntarily, if they can afford to buy cylinders at the market price — is nothing but a publicity stunt. 

His appeal once again proves that there is no change in the basic functioning of the National Democratic Alliance government, right from Atal Behari Vajpayee’s time in the late 1990s to 2004, and now under Narendra Modi.

Mr Modi’s appeal tries to give an impression that people are at fault by claiming subsidy, while the government is generous in extending subsidy to all (even to people who are not eligible and can afford to buy at the market rate).

Mr Modi is conveniently forgetting that the prices of petrol, diesel and LPG should be fixed in accordance with the international crude oil prices and this policy decision was taken by none other than Mr Vajpayee. The same policy was followed by the United Progressive Alliance government.

Mr Modi should realise that international crude oil prices peaked during the UPA regime and crossed the $115 per barrel-mark. The crude prices have today come down to just about $50. However, petrol and diesel are still sold for nearly Rs 70 and Rs 60 per litre respectively and subsidised LPG cylinder for Rs 450. 

The rates are almost the same as during the UPA regime, when crude prices were much higher. Mr Modi should know that the amount he is losing on account of LPG subsidy is small when compared to what he is minting from the public by deliberately keeping the LPG and fuel prices on the higher side despite steep decrease in crude prices.

As per the open market policy being adopted by the Union governments since Mr Vajpayee’s tenure, the current price of petrol should be Rs 30 per litre, diesel should be Rs 21 per litre and LPG cylinder for Rs 250.

But the NDA government has been openly looting the public by imposing various taxes and deliberately keeping the prices higher.

Under these circumstances, what right does Mr Modi have to ask people to give up subsidies voluntarily? 

If he is really sincere and committed towards saving public money, he should allow the prices of LPG and fuel to be in accordance with the present crude prices.

Moreover, Mr Modi should also realise that people are already over-burdened with various taxes imposed by the Centre and they have every right to seek LPG subsidy from the Centre. Service tax was hiked indiscriminately recently and there is a proposal to impose another cess for Swachh Bharat.

It is meaningless to put the blame on people for subsidy burden while the reality is that Mr Modi alone is imposing heavy burden on people by deliberately keeping prices of LPG and fuel high.

Way to help in nation-building
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s appeal to the rich to give up LPG subsidy is a welcome gesture. The country has spent thousands of crores on subsidy over many decades. Many subsidy schemes were introduced just for the sake of “vote-bank” politics. Nowhere in the world does any country provide as many subsidies as India.

While I am not against providing subsidies, they should serve as a tool to uplift the needy. The affluent and upper middle-class of the society, who can afford to buy a LPG cylinder at the market price, should take this as an invitation to be a part of nation-building.

India is striving to become an economic powerhouse. But it will not succeed if it continues to bleed a lot of money in the way of subsidies for those who can afford LPG at market price. People from the rich and upper middle-class sections of the society talk of India’s development and how things should change.
This is a chance for them to contribute towards the change they desire and deserve.

A large section of the population in the country today enjoys a good standard of living and earns a decent income. If all such people decide to sacrifice their LPG subsidy, the amount accumulated through such sacrificed subsidies will be substantial. This money can in turn be utilised for some nation-building activity and to provide better services to the country’s citizens.

I believe subsidies should be for the needy, like the Below Poverty Line and lower middle-class families, as they require subsidy to uplift themselves. But those who can afford it, must ponder over this suggestion by the Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister has not made it mandatory for the affluent and upper middle-class people to sacrifice their LPG subsidy. This is to ensure that no one feels that they are being discriminated against on the basis of income. Instead, the PM has given a choice to the people, leaving it completely to their conscience.

This gives an opportunity to many people to develop a mindset of sacrificing monetary benefit for the betterment of society at large.

For many, it may seem that it will not matter much if they sacrifice their subsidy, but as they say, little drops of water make a mighty ocean.