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

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

12076 - Linking Mobile Number With Aadhaar: Misinterpreting A Supreme Court Order - Live Law


BY: LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK SEPTEMBER 17, 2017 10:45 PM...

It appears many telecom service providers have been alerting their customers to link their mobile numbers with their Aadhaar numbers, in terms of a circular issued on March 23, 2017, by the Department of Telecom (DoT).   This circular calls upon all the telecom operators to conduct an Aadhaar-based re-verification exercise  of all existing pre-paid and post-paid mobile connections.  The deadline fixed for this is February 6, 2018....

The DoT circular cites an observation of the Supreme Court in Lokniti Foundation v Union of India, in the order issued by the then Chief Justice of India, J.S.Khehar, on February 6 this year....

This order was issued, on the basis of submissions by the then Attorney General, Mukul Rohatgi, who supported the plea of the petitioner, for 100  per cent verification of mobile phone subscribers, in view of the increasing number of instances of mobile phone being used for crime.   The Supreme Court bench of the Chief Justice J.S.Khehar and Justice N.V.Ramana, found the plea a “commendable cause”.   The bench agreed with the petitioner, that mobile phones are used not only for domestic criminal activity, but also, for known terrorist activity (sometimes with foreign involvement). The bench took note of the affidavit of the Union of India, wherein it was stated that the DoT has launched Aadhaar-based Know Your Customer  for issuing mobile connections, on 16.8.16, to authenticate the customer.  The bench also noted that the number of Aadhaar cards already issued constituted 87.09 per cent of population, as on January 31, 2017....

The Centre told the bench that the petitioner’s concerns would be addressed, as far as the new mobile phone connections from August 16, 2016.  As more than 90 per cent of the subscribers are using pre-paid connections, the Centre proposed that it put in place a mechanism, similar to the one adopted for new subscribers, so that when pre-paid connections come up for renewals, the verification could be insisted upon.  The bench expressed its satisfaction that this verification process would be within one year, and disposed the petition with the hope and expectation that the undertaking given to the court would be taken seriously, and would be given effect to, as soon as possible

Can the DoT  construe this order as a direction to link Aadhaar number with the mobile numbers of the existing subscribers?...

First and foremost, Rohatgi did not inform the bench on February 6, that another three-Judge bench of the Supreme Court had made enrolment of Aadhaar optional, and directed the Government not to make it mandatory. As the Chief Justice Khehar and Justice Ramana were neither part of the three-Judge bench, which issued the order on August 11, 2015, and the five Judge Constitution Bench on October 15, 2015, which reiterated that order, they were perhaps unaware of of its relevance in the case of mobile phone verification.  It was the duty of the AG to inform the bench about its relevance, but he chose not to, as he shared the concerns of the petitioner.

While 100 per cent verification of the mobile phone subscribers was considered desirable in this case, the bench did not explore whether there could be alternatives to making Aadhaar mandatory, as it is presently under legal challenge.  A three-Judge bench had referred the issue of right to privacy being a fundamental right, to a larger bench, and the challenge to Aadhaar scheme, and the Aadhaar law was in a limbo, when the two-Judge bench heard the Lokniti Foundation’s petition seeking 100 per cent verification of mobile phone subscribers.  Therefore, when the AG made the UOI’s claims on Aadhaar-based verification of mobile phone subscribers, the bench should have asked the Centre to propose measures other than Aadhaar-based verification, to meet the concerns of the petitioner.   As this was not done, the “hope and expectation” expressed in the order must be taken to mean exactly that and not a direction, to the authorities to make Aadhaar mandatory for existing or future mobile phone subscribers....

If you read the order carefully, it would show that it is silent on the verification of the existing post-paid subscribers of the mobile phones.  The pre-paid customers, when they seek renewal of their connections, and the fresh applicants for mobile phone connection, would come under the new verification process, based on the Aadhaar number.   Can this be stretched to mean that the existing post-paid subscribers, who don’t need to furnish fresh documents, are also bound to link their phone numbers with the Aadhaar numbers?...

This appears to be an  unreasonable interpretation, as the Court had assumed that their verification was already complete, and need not be reopened again, even if there is some justification for insisting on  Aadhaar number for pre-paid customers seeking renewal and the fresh applicants for connections. Read the Order Here...

Read more at: http://www.livelaw.in/linking-mobile-number-aadhaar-misinterpreting-supreme-court-order/