AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 8338 - Citizens do not have fundamental right to privacy: Centre tells SC

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, July 26, 2015

8338 - Citizens do not have fundamental right to privacy: Centre tells SC - Hindustan Times

Citizens do not have fundamental right to privacy: Centre tells SC

HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, New Delhi| Updated: Jul 23, 2015 01:50 IST

The government told the Supreme Court on Wednesday privacy was not a fundamental right under the Constitution and couldn’t be invoked to scrap the Aadhaar scheme that has run into controversy over its collection of troves of personal data.

Attorney general Mukul Rohatgi told an SC bench the judiciary didn’t have a uniform view on the matter and urged them to refer the petitions challenging Aadhaar to a larger Constitution bench.

“Constitution makers did not intend to make right to privacy a fundamental right,” Rohatgi told the bench, during the hearing of petitions opposing a government order that made the 12-number unique identification number mandatory, especially for seeking government welfare benefits.

The A-G said two top court verdicts in the 1950s — delivered by large benches comprising eight and six judges respectively — supported his stance but the apex judiciary’s views subsequently underwent a change during the course of 25 decisions delivered by smaller benches.

Through these judgments, the right to privacy came to be recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21 that guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, he said.

The identification scheme has been promoted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to check subsidy leakages and ensure proper monitoring of schemes but the petitioners argued no law empowered the Unique Identification Authority of India to collect biometric details.

The scheme infringed on their right to privacy as their particulars could be used by any external agency, they said.

But Rohatgi told the court it should balance the petitioner’s rights against those of the roughly 700 million people, whose subsidies and welfare benefits were dependent on the “fool-proof scheme.”

He said any further hearing in the case would impact the issuance of driving licenses, passports, National Population Register and said Aadhaar was necessary as the country was battling an illegal immigrant problem.

But the petitioner’s counsel and senior advocate Shyam Divan countered the argument and said privacy was core to a civilisation. “It is a pillar of society,” he told a bench headed by justice J Chelameswar.

The ambitious Aadhaar scheme has been dogged by controversies since it was inaugurated by then UPA government.

The SC in March ruled that the 12-digit number couldn’t be made mandatory for government entitlements but a number of states have made it compulsory for employment under the rural jobs scheme and electoral enrolment.

A committee set up by the Centre in 2000 recommended privacy be made a fundamental right subject to certain restrictions.

In 2011, a group of experts set up by the Planning Commission to explore loopholes in privacy protection laws recommended the government conduct an in-depth analysis of its programmes to find out impact on privacy, which was to be incorporated into a proposed bill on the issue.