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, August 2, 2015

8411 - Forced to have Biometric Aadhaar? File an affidavit in Supreme Court before by 3rd August to get relief

Press Release

Forced to have Biometric Aadhaar? File an affidavit in Supreme Court before by 3rd August to get relief

Court wants specific instances of violations of its order

Biometric profiling promotes genetically determined caste system

1st August, 2015: As per Supreme Court’s website the case against biometric aadhaar number is “Likely to be Listed on: 04/08/2015”. Earlier, on 30th July, 2015, the Court said that after hearing the whole matter if it found reasons they would give whatever order was necessary. The judges were concerned about denial of any service to any Indian resident because they did not have an aadhaar and asked for specific instances of violations of is orders. It wanted affidavit stating the same to enable it to pass orders in this regard.

Gopal Subramanian, Senior Advocate for the petitioner seeking scrapping of 12 digit biometric aadhaar number project concluded his arguments raising the issue of governments and their institutions violating Supreme Court’s orders. He underlined the issue of inter connectivity of various databases and seeding of aadhaar into all the databases. The counsel sought enforcement of court’s orders and sought immediate protection of all the children from biometric profiling. From Government’s side Additional Solicitor General of India, Pinky Anand apparently misinformed the Supreme Court that there is no interconnectivity between biometric aadhaar and other programs and databases of the government contrary to documentary evidence which were shown to the court. 

Apparently, applauding herself, she was heard telling the Senior Advocate that he did not get any desired interim relief not realizing that the court made it explicitly apparent that their reiteration of the previous orders even in the face of violations hasn’t been sufficient

Towards the end of the hearing on 30th July, Shyam Diwan, Senior Advocate representing Justice K S Puttaswamy (Retd) appeared and supported Subramanian’s contention against seeding of aadhaar with other databases such as electoral database. He asked the court time to argue the matter on Tuesday, 4th August, 2015.    

There is documentary evidence to suggest that a situation is emerging where if the pre-existing databases like electoral database, census and other databases which are under preparation are converged at the behest of unaccountable and undemocratic financial institutions and biometric surveillance technology companies. The court is yet to take cognizance of it although future heads of states, prime ministers, legislators, law enforcers, military and security personnel are being made transparent to transnational powers without factoring in its far reaching security implications for decades and centuries to come. 

The collection of biometric data, personal sensitive information which is deemed “asset” is illegal and mandatory requirement for aadhaar in manifest contempt Supreme Court’s repeated orders during 23rd September, 2013 till 16th March, 2015. When confronted with such gross wrongful acts, adopting the posture of “offense is the best defence”, in a stark case of misrepresentation of relevant precedents, Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi orally submitted in the biometric aadhaar case in the Supreme Court that right to privacy is not a fundamental right. 

During the hearing Subramanian contended that right to privacy is an inalienable birth right and natural right during the pre-lunch hearing. In fact he argued, birth itself is a gift of privacy.

The fact remains aadhaar based on indiscriminate biometric profiling is an assault on right to privacy.  
Notably, Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) had set up a Biometrics Standards Committee which revealed that 'the biometrics will be captured for authentication by government departments and commercial organisations at the time of service delivery.' The commercial organisation mentioned herein is not defined. Notably, Biometrics Standards Committee had categorically stated that UID/aadhaar’s is meant only for “civilian application” but the order on aadhaar enabled biometric attendance system has been extended to defence employees as well. The fact remains UID was first adopted by USA’s Department of Defence, later by NATO. It has subsequently been pushed through World Bank’s eTransform Initiative in partnership with France, South Korea, Gemalto, IBM, L1, Microsoft, Intel and Pfizer. Some of them have signed agreements with UIDAI. This constitutes not only a threat to privacy but also to national security.  

Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL) which has been opposing biometric enrollment, profiling, databasing and surveillance through aadhaar like schemes since 2010 appeals to fellow citizens to send information about specific instances wherein they were denied services in the absence of aadhaar or they were compelled to enroll for aadhaar. This is urgently required by to be filed in the court as an affidavit. If such facts can be shared, lawyers representing the petitioners can prepare it as an affidavit. CFCL had appeared before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance that trashed the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 that wished legalise UIDAI and aadhaar through an ex post facto law in order to escape adverse judicial action. Notably, the Bill did not define biometric data which as per Information Technology Act includes DNA data. Government’s Centre for DNA Fingerprinting & Diagnostics (CDFD) is seeking caste data as well paving the path of genetic determinism. Such projects have been abandoned in UK, Australia, China, France, USA, Philippines and other countries. CFCL attended the hearing in the Supreme Court on 29th and 30th July, 2015 and has been following the case since 2012 when the case against aadhaar was first filed.  

CFCL seeks attention of fellow citizens who want to say that they enrolled for 12 digit biometric aadhaar number because of a threat of discontinuance of a service, they too should share their formal statements in this regard. It could be quite useful. They could also make statements asking that their number be deleted from the aadhaar database called Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR) because they never wanted to be there in the first place. Such statements will illustrate how the aadhaar database was and is being constructed through coercion and not through consent or voluntarily. It will underline the absence of free informed consent. The cases of specific instances can be communicated to Email-1715krishna@gmail.com

(Aadhaar authentication is the process wherein aadhaar number, along with other attributes (demographic and/or biometrics and/or One Time PIN [OTP]) is submitted to UIDAI’s CIDR) for verification. Biometrics is a method by which a person's authentication information is generated by digitizing measurements of a physiological or behavioral characteristic. Biometric authentication verifies user's claimed identity by comparing an encoded value with a stored value of the concerned biometric characteristic.) Scientific studies have established that this technology is inherently fallible. The uniqueness and permanence of measurable biological material which is the very basis of aadhaar is a admittedly only a postulate.     

Given the fact that hearing is underway since 21st July, all eyes are on the three judge bench to set matters right by ensuring that its orders are complied with before addressing issues of constitutionality. In a situation no one has been held accountable for violating court’s previous orders on mandatororiness of aadhaar wherein almost every government entity has deliberately chosen not to comply with it, how can court be convinced that its verdict on the constitutionality of biometric data collection and aadhaar will be complied with?  

For Details: Gopal Krishna, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL) Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660 E-mail-1715krishna@gmail.com


For more background information visit:



Repository of aadhaar related articles: aadhararticles.blogspot.com compiled by Ram Krishnaswamy