The Modi government submitted before the Supreme Court that right to life of millions of poor in the country through food, shelter and welfare measures was far more important than privacy concerns raised by the elite class.
| Posted by Ganesh Kumar Radha Udayakumar
New Delhi, July 27, 2017 | UPDATED 05:31 IST
HIGHLIGHTS
- 1 - Aadhaar essential for transparent implementation of government programmes: AG
- 2 - No going back after enrolling nearly 100 crore citizens: AG
- 3 - Biometric details for aadhaar are essential for saving prople from animal existence: AG
The Aadhaar hearing in the Supreme Court is fast turning into a right to privacy raised by the "elite" class versus right to life for millions of poor in the country.
Strongly backing the Aadhaar scheme, the Modi government on Wednesday submitted before the Supreme Court that the right to life of millions of poor in the country through food, shelter and welfare measures was far more important than privacy concerns raised by the elite class.
Controversially, Attorney General K K Venugopal arguing for the Centre also stated that privacy claims required better priority in developed countries "not in a country like India where a vast majority of citizens don't have access to basic needs".
He said right to privacy cannot be invoked to scrap the Aadhaar scheme. The government was categorical that after enrolling nearly 100 crore citizens spending an astronomical amount of Rs 6,300 crore there was no going back.
'AADHAAR ESSENTIAL FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE'
The AG attempted to drive home the point that Aadhaar was essential for good governance, transparent implementation of government programmes and to ensure that benefits reach only those who qualify to get them and not ghost beneficiaries.
"Through aadhaar, benefits of welfare schemes reaches only those who are entitled to it. Depriving large sections of people of food, shelter and welfare schemes is also depriving them of fundamental right to live. Biometric details for aadhaar is essential for saving prople from animal existence", Venugopal told a nine-judge bench which is deciding whether right to privacy should be declared a fundamental right.
At one point, Justice D Y Chandrachud, who was part of the bench, interjected the AG saying privacy is not an elitist concern and it is equally applicable to the large masses. "For example, if state wants forced sterilisation on say slum dwellers for population control among that group, perhaps only privacy claim may stand in the way", said Justice Chandrachud.
"Privacy is ingrained in right to life and liberty...each one of them cannot be and need not be elevated as a fundamental right. It has to be on a case to case basis. Privacy is just one specie like right to have passport, right not to be handcuffed they are various specie of public liberty", argued Venugopal.
He also reminded the bench that "world bank has said all countries must follow aadhaar- like model".
'TRANSGRESSION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS'
The bench is hearing PILs filed by a retired Karnataka High Court judge K. Puttaswamy, and social activist Aruna Roy against making the cards mandatory for accessing government schemes and subsidies.
They argued that the manner in which biometric information is extracted violates and transgresses individual rights of citizens including privacy.
The PILs had said the manner in which biometric details are collected by private contractors and NGOs hired by UIDAI without any safeguard makes them prone to misuse.
They claimed empirical research to show that the biometric identification denoted for UID, namely the iris scan and finger print identification, is faulty and is capable of being abused.
