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, August 17, 2015

8538 - ‘Scientific ambitions behind DNA Profiling Bill’ by Usha Ramanathan - The Hindu

Recession Begins 2015 - RBA documents prove Australia to enter recession. Report reveals all www.dailyreckoning.com.au

The Hindu
Legal researcher Usha Ramanathan. File photo: K.V. Srinivasan


Legal researcher Usha Ramanathan speaks about the the modified draft Bill which continues to raise several critical concerns relating to privacy, ethical usage of DNA samples and DNA database.

This week, the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) uploaded a slightly modified draft of the Human DNA Profiling Bill on its website, opening up the controversial Bill, now tabled in Parliament, for public scrutiny.
Legal researcher Usha Ramanathan, a member of the Committee formed by the Centre in 2013 to review this Bill, spoke to The Hindu about the modified draft Bill which continues to raise several critical concerns relating to privacy, ethical usage of DNA samples and uses of the proposed DNA database. In February this year, she wrote a dissent note to the DBT highlighting the Bill’s controversial provisions, but her concerns remain unaddressed.
“Like the Unique Identification (UID) project in which the government collected biometric samples of citizens to create a general database, marketing it as ‘Aadhaar’ or the basis for citizens to seek entitlements, the DNA database too aims to collect citizen DNA samples and make a database out of it. In UID, biometric data samples were collected from willing or coerced citizens, but there was no way people could opt out of the database once in it, as no consent clause or guidelines for sample collection were specified for it. The DNA Profiling Bill too brings similar concerns,” she says.
Biometric through Aadhaar
With the Supreme Court now coming down heavily on the government for insisting on biometric profiling of citizens through Aadhaar, the question is whether the government ought to push the draft DNA Bill in its current form, given its unresolved concerns. The Bill contains provisions for a volunteer’s index and collection of “such other DNA indices as may be specified by regulation,” which, Ms. Ramanathan says, is problematic, as it is not sure who might be coerced into giving biological samples under these provisions.
The Director of the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics in India (CDFD), based in Hyderabad, will always be the ex-officio member-secretary of the DNA Profiling Board as per the Bill. That the agency has been given considerable powers to take decisions regarding DNA sample usage and regulate DNA profiling in India is itself a cause for concern, she says. The reason is the 12th plan (2012-17) document put up on the Department of Science and Technology (DST) website, describes the CDFD as intending to conduct “Human population analysis with a view to eliciting signature profiling of different caste populations of India to use them in forensic DNA fingerprinting and develop DNA databases.” An identification form for DNA sample tests, put up on the CDFD website, of which The Hindu too accessed a copy, includes an entry column for filling ‘caste and origin of State’ information. Ms. Ramanathan says this is the source of current concerns regarding how an agency empowered by the proposed law might use DNA samples to profile people on the basis of caste.
Further, Schedule I under the Act, in the ‘List of Matters for DNA Profiling’ allows for data collection on maternity or paternity disputes, issues relating to pedigree, surrogacy and immigration or emigration as well.
The Board, in which CDFD plays a central role, will also control how privacy concerns are addressed. With the ongoing Supreme Court case on Aadhar not taking a definitive stance on privacy, the privacy concerns raised by the DNA database project too hang in the balance, she says. The UIDAI vs. CBI case has revealed the difficulties of safeguarding a database — apart from the technical difficulties — when such a database has been created, she says.
There are clearly scientific ambitions fuelling the DNA database project, Ms. Ramanathan says. In the same 12th plan document, CDFD is also described as aiming to work on molecular genetics, cytogenetics, biochemical genetics, newborn screening centre and develop a national database for genetic disorders.
No studies have been done on the costs involved in pursuing the extraordinary ambitions that the Bill sets out, she has pointed out in the dissent note submitted to the government. “The DNA database annual report of UK shows that the UK Home Office spent £2.2 million in 2013-14 in running the National DNA Database on behalf of the UK police forces. Can India afford to pump in such vast sums of money to aid a scientific agency’s research ambitions?” she asks.
Keywords: Human DNA Profiling BillDepartment of Biotechnology