TNN | Aug 21, 2017, 01:29 AM IST
A nine-judge Constitution bench is set to give its judgment on whether a fundamental right to privacy exists under the Constitution. The verdict will remain authoritative for decades, defining the relationship between citizens and the state in the digital era. It will right away impact the outcome of about 24 cases where various aspects of Aadhaar have been challenged, petitioners arguing that the scheme and making it mandatory violates fundamental rights to privacy and equality. Here, a lowdown ahead of the privacy hearing
Will the nine-judge bench decide on Aadhaar?
The bench will decide whether a fundamental right to privacy exists under the Indian Constitution. This bench will not decide the fate of Aadhaar, only the nature and status of the right to privacy under the Constitution. The SC ruling will, however, be extremely important in deciding the fate of Aadhaar and will impact all public and private services with which Aadhaar is linked, from requesting an ambulance to opening a bank account. It will have far-reaching ramifications in this digital age: how much can the state know about us, and what it can do with that knowledge? The right to privacy impacts many more issues than just Aadhaar and will allow claims in the context of beef ban laws, prohibition, women's reproductive rights as well.
What are the arguments on either side?
The petitioners say that the SC has recognised the fundamental right to privacy in an unbroken chain of judgments. They say privacy is associated with and is the bulwark of other rights. There can be no dignity without privacy, and dignity is part of the Preamble, which is part of the Constitution's basic structure. Privacy is located in the golden trinity of Articles 14, 19, and 21. They argue that the Constitution is a living document. Its interpretation must be in accord with passage of time and developments in law. They say India has international obligations to recognise a fundamental right to privacy. The respondents say that privacy is a vague concept, and vague concepts cannot be made fundamental rights. Some aspects of privacy are covered by Article 21 and its other aspects should be regulated by laws only, not separately as a fundamental right. Right to life of others is more important than right to privacy. If right to privacy impedes Aadhaar, then it would deprive millions of food and shelter. They argue framers intentionally did not include privacy in fundamental rights section.
Without linking Aadhaar, will government schemes be impacted?
There is conflicting data. A 2012 study by National Institute of Public Finance and Policy estimated that linking Aadhaar could save a tenth of money spent on PDS and MGNREGS schemes. But the study was criticised for using outdated data on leakages, and overestimating the number of ghost beneficiaries.
It is also unclear how much of the 'savings' from linking Aadhaar to schemes is because genuine beneficiaries are now excluded. In a study of Hyderabad PDS outlets linked to Aadhaar, nearly 10% of households reported technical problems with Aadhaar due to which they did not receive rations. The Economic Survey 2015-16 claimed that linking Aadhaar to LPG subsidies had saved the government 25%. But the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) estimated that 92% of this 'saving' was due to the fall in global oil prices. Apart from these uncertain savings, rollout of government schemes would continue as earlier without Aadhaar, since Aadhaar is meant to help existing schemes. In fact, there have been reports that rollout of Aadhaar-based systems is posing some problems. Fingerprint authentication often does not work if labourers' hands are callused; the elderly and disabled have trouble accessing affordable transport go to government centres, instead of sending others as they did earlier; technical problems abound with uneven quality of connections and devices.
TOP COMMENT
When the Aadhar act itself unequivocally stipulates that enrolment is voluntary, how can the Govt., make it mandatory in every aspect of public life where the citizens are involved with Govt., Institutions, Agencies and Public utilities? This itself clearly goes against the very essence and spirit of the Act and is violative of its principles and an assault on Citizens basic rights.
The Supreme Court should have taken cognisance of this aspect and reprimanded the recalcitrant Govt., with harsh indictments and strictures.
Shravan
Is the demand for citizen data the issue, or the security of the data?
Both. Creating one database of all details for an all-purpose ID (Aadhaar) creates its own problems — the spectre of surveillance, the possibility of exclusion from all government services, among others. On the security front, several experts believe that for centralised databases, "the question is not whether it can be hacked, but when."
(With inputs from Vidhi Centre For Legal Policy)
