AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 8379 - DNA profiling bill allows for 'intimate' samples

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

Monday, July 27, 2015

8379 - DNA profiling bill allows for 'intimate' samples - TNN

DNA profiling bill allows for 'intimate' samples

Manoj Mitta,TNN | Jul 26, 2015, 02.32 AM IST

The human DNA profiling Bill, as recommended by an official expert committee, has controversial clauses dealing with "issues relating to pedigree" and introducing an intrusive mode of collecting samples from living persons called "intimate forensic procedure".

NEW DELHI: The human DNA profiling Bill, as recommended by an official expert committee, has controversial clauses dealing with "issues relating to pedigree" and introducing an intrusive mode of collecting samples from living persons called "intimate forensic procedure".

This procedure detailed in the draft Bill due to be introduced in the current session of Parliament involves collection of "intimate body samples" of living persons from "the genital or anal area, the buttocks and also breasts in the case of a female".

Intimate forensic procedure includes "external examination" of private parts, taking samples from there "of pubic hair" or "by swab or washing" or "by vacuum suction, by scraping or by lifting by tape" and "taking of a photograph or video recording of, or an impression or cast of a wound" in those areas.

Submitted in January by the committee headed by T S Rao, senior adviser to the department of biotechnology, the draft Bill explains that "intimate body samples from living persons shall be collected and intimate forensic procedures shall be performed by a registered medical practitioner".

It also makes clear that intimate forensic procedure will be applied not just to an "offender" who is defined as "a person who has been convicted of or an under trial charged with a specified offence". The DNA data bank will also be authorized to collect samples from anybody who is deemed to be "suspect" in relation to any crime. The range of persons on who the data bank will maintain "indices" includes those connected with "crime scene" and those with "missing persons". What is even more open-ended is the clause empowering the data bank to maintain an index on "volunteers" and "such other DNA indices as may be specified by regulations" issued after the enactment of the law.

DNA profiling for armed forces by 2020

Equally significant is the clause stating that the samples collected in relation to DNA profiling "shall be made available" not only in criminal cases but also "civil matters" such as disputes relating to paternity or maternity, surrogacy, organ donation, immigration, emigration and individual identity. Listed among these routine civil matters is, shockingly, "issues relating to pedigree". The draft Bill does not however explain anywhere why exactly human DNA profiling will be applied to determine pedigree.

Apart from the bald reference to pedigree issues, the draft Bill says that the information related to DNA profile shall be made available "for creation and maintenance of a population statistics Data Bank that is to be used, as prescribed, for the purposes of identification research, protocol development or quality control provided that it does not contain any personally identifiable information and does not violate ethical norms".

The clause relating to pedigree may be connected to an existing practice of linking caste to the DNA sample. The identification form issued by the Hyderabad-based Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), the premier national institute, contains a column requiring the person giving a blood sample to mention the caste. This prompted one of the members of the expert panel, Usha Ramanathan, to say the column resurrected the discredited idea of "genes of criminality".

Ramanathan struck a note of dissent even on the application of DNA profiling to the so-called issues relating to pedigree. She wrote: "Biological determinism ought not to displace environmental and sociological understanding." On intimate forensic procedure, Ramanathan stressed the need "to question" whether it could be avoided for living persons if "a sample of adequate quality" could be obtained through less intrusive means. Such concerns have evidently been overruled by the majority in the expert committee, which included the director of CDFD, J Gowrishankar. For, rather than coming out with a report along with dissent notes, the committee simply submitted the minutes of the four meetings that had been held by it.

Despite its far-reaching consequences for privacy, the draft Bill has not been placed in the public domain for pre-legislative consultation. Since it is slated to be introduced in the ongoing session of Parliament, representatives of civil society may now get a chance to express their views if and only when the Bill is referred to a standing committee.