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

Sunday, June 7, 2015

8106 - NSA programme: Bush-era powers expire as US prepares to roll back surveillance - The Guardian



Sweeping intelligence capabilities exposed by Edward Snowden shut down as hawks concede defeat on first major surveillance reform in a generation

 ‘Tonight begins the process of ending bulk collection,’ said Senator Rand Paul, who forced a shutdown of surveillance authorities covered by the Bush-era Patriot Act. Photograph: Pete Marovich/EPA

Dan Roberts and Ben Jacobsin Washington and Spencer Ackerman in New York

Monday 1 June 2015 07.21 BSTLast modified on Monday 1 June 201507.53 BST

Sweeping US surveillance powers, enjoyed by the National Security Agency since the aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attacks, shut down at midnight after a dramatic Senate showdown in which even the NSA’s biggest supporters conceded that substantial reforms were inevitable.

Almost two years after the whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the Guardian that the Patriot Act was secretly being used to justify the collection of phone records from millions of Americans, critics of bulk surveillance went further than expected and forced the end of a range of other legal authorities covered by the Bush-era Patriot Act as well.

The expired provisions, subject to a “sunset” clause from the beginning of June onwards, are likely to be replaced later this week with new legislation – the USA Freedom Act – that permanently bans the NSA from collecting telephone records in bulk and introduces new transparency rules for other surveillance activities. The USA Freedom Act, once passed, will be the first rollback of NSA surveillance since the seminal 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

But until then, in addition to the expiration of the NSA’s phone records collection, the FBI is prevented from using powers granted under the Patriot Act, including the pursuit of so-called “business records” relating to internet use, hotel and rental car records and credit card statements.

Both developments represent a remarkable capitulation for the Republican Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who had initially sought to simply extend the Patriot Act provisions, despite overwhelming support in the House of Representatives for the USA Freedom Act.

McConnell and his colleagues who opposed reform were thwarted in their efforts by a growing backlash by Senate Republicans and, in particular, his Kentucky colleague, Senator Rand Paul.

“This is the only realistic way forward,” acknowledged the Republican leader during a rare Sunday evening session just hours before the Patriot Act was set to expire. Shortly after, the Senate voted 77 to 17 to proceed to debate on the USA Freedom Act – a procedural hurdle that fell three votes short during another special session focused on surveillance reform nine days earlier.

The development was welcomed by the White House, which has also come to support the USA Freedom Act after Barack Obama proposed that the NSA could seek specific records directly from telephone companies instead.

“The Senate took an important – if late – step forward tonight,” White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, said. “We call on the Senate to ensure this irresponsible lapse in authorities is as short-lived as possible.”

Even Paul, after the procedural vote, conceded that the bill will now ultimately pass, although he appeared determined to drag it out as a long as possible. “Tonight begins the process of ending bulk collection,” he said.

Paul, who is running for president on a libertarian-leaning agenda, believes the USA Freedom Act does not go far enough in tackling the surveillance abuses revealed by Snowden.

“I am not going to take it any more and I believe the American people are not going to take it any more,” Paul said as he took the Senate floor for another of the extended speeches that have helped propel him into the public spotlight at a key moment in the Republican race for the presidency.

FacebookTwitterPinterest
 Senator Mitch McConnell said voting on the House-backed USA Freedom Act was ‘certainly not ideal’ but was ‘now the only realistic way forward’ on a surveillance impasse. Photograph: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

McConnell attempted to seek a temporary extension for additional Patriot Act powers to be affected by the expiration of powers unrelated to the NSA’s bulk domestic phone metadata program – including so-called “lone-wolf” and “roving wiretap” capabilities.

But even a temporary continuation of those surveillance authorities were opposed by Paul, who has the power to block such attempts to speed up Senate business by seeking unanimous consent.

Paul’s tactics provoked angry reactions from establishment Republicans, including a heated exchange with John McCain, who accused him of endangering national security to boost his presidential campaign. McCain said on Sunday that Paul “obviously has a higher priority on his fundraising and political ambitions than securing the nation”.

Paul, gesturing toward the acrimony that persists in the Senate even after the vote made passage of the USA Freedom Act a foregone conclusion, said his Republican opponents were rooting for a terrorist attack to embarrass him.

“Some of them I think secretly want an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me,” Paul said.

Obama and his intelligence chief, James Clapper, also made a final push on Friday for the Senate to pass the USA Freedom Act, alleging the expiration of the Patriot Act provisions would expose the US to terrorism.

But a Justice Department inspector general report found the FBI had come to use the business-records provision to amass “large collections” of Americans’ communications data. It noted that the spread of internet access had lead to an explosion in information accessible to the FBI, and cast doubt on Justice Department and congressional assurances that the authority, known as Section 215, is critical for counterterrorism.

“[T]he agents we interviewed did not identify any major case developments that resulted from use of the records obtained in response to Section 215 orders, but told us that the material produced pursuant to Section 215 orders was valuable in that it was used to support other investigative requests, develop investigative leads, and corroborate other information,” the DoJ report found.

Originally mindful of the privacy implications of Section 215, Congress permitted it to “sunset” after five years. Yet with nearly all aspects of its practical applications hidden under extensive secrecy – especially the post-2006 addition of NSA bulk surveillance – reauthorization of the Patriot Act provisions had become routine.

The last time the legislation was considered, in 2011, it passed 72-23 in the Senate and 250-153 in the House.

But this time, Snowden’s revelations pierced the veneer of government secrecy and ushered in perhaps the most open debate about surveillance powers in the NSA’s 63-year history.


“No doubt it played a role,” Republican senator Dean Heller told the Guardian. “I think it played the same role for me as it did for most of the American people, who were surprised and stunned that the government had this sort of access to this kind of data.”