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

Thursday, September 3, 2015

8648 - Fallout of digital inclusion - Live Mint

Last Modified: Wed, Sep 02 2015. 12 32 AM IST

I fear that digital inclusion efforts will end up sending the bulk of the population into a state of exclusion



Photo: Vimages

Is digital inclusion dividing rather than connecting people? 

Are efforts such as the National Digital Literacy Mission (NDLM) and Common Services Centre (CSC) schemes making people’s lives more convenient or just miserable? 

With Digital India, are we trying to achieve efficiency, less bureaucracy and more transparency or are we creating another barrier to cross, another opportunity for middlemen to use as a means to exploit people? 

By digital inclusion, do we mean harnessing computers and the Internet to convert things into a digital format or are we looking to re-engineer manual processes in a way where digital intervention can provide solutions and not problems?

In urban areas, we use email, social media and the Internet and feel we have truly achieved serious efficiency in communication—we can reach anybody, we can talk to anyone, so much so that we can even reach the prime minister in real time.

However, if we travel to rural areas, spend some time in the villages, and try to observe and experience how digital tools have affected their lives, the reality one experiences is a harsh one. In our villages, there are only a few interfaces where people experience the interventions of digital tools, and most of them end up making their lives not only miserable but also snatch away their basic rights, such as freedom, access and entitlements.

Take, for example, the NDLM, which is an endeavour to ensure that the maximum number of people in rural India become digitally literate. The scheme may have a target of just about four million, but this is a mission where even companies have jumped in with a lot of enthusiasm.

However, in the past two years, since the scheme was announced, we have not achieved even the first target of 1 million. According to the NDLM website, only 277,725 people have been certified digitally literate, against the 1.4 million enrolled through 1,164 training partners across India. 

Beside these numbers, what’s the bottleneck that is making it more exclusionary than inclusive? 

The NDLM makes it mandatory to have an Aadhaar number. If you don’t have one, you cannot become a training partner or a trainee. The demand for an Aadhaar number not only excludes many truly deserving candidates from receiving digital literacy but also violates fundamental rights and breaches the Supreme Court interim order of 2013.

Besides an Aadhaar number, the mission requires the training partner to make an additional investment in a biometric machine. Once the training of a candidate is over, the certification is done through an online test, wherein a webcam, among other equipment, has to identify the person taking the test—very often, the online system does not work properly. 

That is why one sees a large difference in the number of people enrolled for digital literacy and those who have got certificates. 

Also, a digitally literate person by training and expertise is unlikely to pass the certification test as it is meant more for testing technical expertise than user-oriented digital literacy.

The CSC scheme is the only scheme in the digital world which has traversed the last mile to provide an opportunity to people to avail of services offered by the government. The scheme is known by different names in different states; for example, in Rajasthan it is known as e-Mitra. For all practical purposes, this government scheme is in the hands of private firms; in fact, it encourages corruption, exploitation and lack of transparency, and creates another barrier for citizens to avail what they used to without digital intervention.


Out of 212 citizen services that e-Mitra kiosks are supposed to provide, most do not entertain more than five to 10 schemes, as they are not lucrative for e-Mitra operators. 

Of the few that are available, such as Jati Praman Patra (caste certificate), Mool Niwas (domicile certificate), ration card and Aadhaar card, none can be acquired without additional pain. The only thing digital about the provision of digital services is that the e-Mitra operator has to scan the entire filled form and send it back to the government office through a digital medium.

Even more painful for the citizen is that he cannot get any of these certificates without going to an e-Mitra counter, which in most cases charges more than the stipulated rate. In several cases, instead of a fee of Rs.30 for a ration card, e-Mitra operators are charging anywhere between Rs.100 and Rs.150. Besides, the citizen has to run around all the local government officers to get signatures and photocopies and photographs before it is considered complete to be submitted to an e-Mitra kiosk.

Now, let’s calculate how many people or applications e-Mitra serves. There are 30,600 e-Mitra kiosks in Rajasthan. In the past one year, e-Mitra received 2,614,365 online applications, out of which 2,391,517 have been disposed of. Which means each e-Mitra has received only 85 applications in one year, leading to just seven applications per month on average. In the name of enabling electronic delivery of citizens’ services, this is a pathetic number.

I fear that digital inclusion efforts will end up sending the bulk of the population into a state of exclusion that will result in a divided society on a scale that the country has never seen before.

Osama Manzar is founder-director of the Digital Empowerment Foundation and chair of the Manthan and mBillionth awards. He is also chair of eNGO Challenge, and is co-author of NetCh@kra—15 Years of Internet in India. Tweet him @osamamanzar