AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 11643 - HC seeks response on Aadhaar enrollment

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

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

11643 - HC seeks response on Aadhaar enrollment - Daily Excelsior

HC seeks response on Aadhaar enrollment

Posted on 25/07/2017 by Dailyexcelsior

Excelsior Correspondent

SRINAGAR, July 24: The High Court today sought response from the Government to the supplementary affidavit on a petition, wherein it is stated that enrolment of Aadhaar system in the State is 67 percent while as 33 percent people have been left out.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Badar Durez Ahmad and Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey while hearing a petition filed by Advocate Syed Musaib Ahmad submitting there-in that Aadhaar Scheme infringes the Right of Privacy and the same is subject matter of five Judge Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court.
State Counsel also submitted before the court that since the issue is pending before the Constitutional bench of Apex Court and with these submissions, Court kept the matter for further proceedings in the month of September and, meantime, sought response to the supplementary affidavit of the petitioner counsel.
High Court last year had stayed the Government order in its entirety with the observation that the Supreme Court has already held possession of Aadhaar is not mandatory but later the court clarified the same and held that the stay is only to the linkage of biometric system with Aadhaar Card as Supreme Court has held that possession of Aadhaar is not mandatory.
It is highlighted in the supplementary affidavit that the total percentage of individuals enrolled with Aadhaar system as on 15.3.2016 is only 67 percent and 33 percent population have been left out as such State of J&K is the lowest enrolled State. It is further highlighted in the affidavit that as per the reports, Aadhaar enrolment centers in the State have already been closed, therefore, remaining 33
percent of the population has no scope or facility of getting enrolled with Aadhaar system and in result they shall be deprived of all benefits available.
In its order Supreme Court has made it clear that Aadhaar Card Scheme is voluntary and cannot be made mandatory till the matter is decided by the Supreme Court in one way or the other and the interim orders shall be strictly followed.
It may be mentioned that High Court quashed the earlier Government order whereby the possession of Adahaar Card was made mandatory for the various purposes including drawing of salary for Government employees.
The court while quashing the said order held that the Government order No. 35-F of 2016 dated 10.2.2016 is in contrary of the orders of Supreme Court as such quashed the same and directed the Government to pass fresh order in tune with the direction of Supreme Court.
State Government had issued an order no. 35-F of 2016 dated 10.2.2016 wherein possession of Aadhaar Card was made mandatory for almost all sections of the people including employees, pensioners, Public Sector Unit Holders etc, while as Supreme Court in its interim order on October 2015, observed that Adahaar Card is ‘purely voluntary’ and not mandatory and it cannot be made mandatory till the matter is decided by the Supreme Court one way or the other.