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

Friday, November 17, 2017

12383 - Black money: Attack on benamis fine, but why is Narendra Modi silent on linking political donations to Aadhaar?- First Post

BusinessDinesh UnnikrishnanNov, 15 2017 12:14:25 IST

The Narendra Modi-government’s intent to crackdown on benami real estate transactions above Rs 30 lakh is a logical follow-up to demonetisation. Perhaps more than demonetisation, investigations on benami properties and shell companies, if done correctly, makes more sense since much of the illegal money is stored in assets rather than hard cash. This is one of the reasons why almost entire money demonetised on 8 November, 2016 reached back to bank counters in no time.
But, attack on benamis is not enough. The Modi government’s seriousness to fight black money will be questioned on account of its reluctance to make political funding transparent. Except for some cosmetic changes, there is no follow-up actions on this so far. Even now, a business house can fund any political party without revealing its face.

In the Union budget 2017-18, the maximum cash donation a political party can accept from one source has been brought down to Rs 2,000. Till then, any political funding less than Rs 20,000 didn’t require to show its source. This was a step in the right direction but no follow-up measures were taken. Even now, any individual can make anonymous cash donations to any political party by splitting it into receipts of less than Rs 2,000. It will take only a few hours even for an average accountant to complete this anonymous transaction. Companies don’t need to disclose the names of political beneficiaries even to their shareholders.

Money thus given to corporations can be claimed back by the donor through various political favors. The political-corporate nexus will continue to thrive in full swing. Imagine a big corporate promoter coming under investigation for black money, the political party which received his political funding will certainly have a sympathetic approach to him/her.

The irony is that all political parties, including the ruling party, know this but no one wants to act since all drink happily from the same cup and it tastes good. The government wants all citizens to link all their activities, including mobile numbers and bank accounts, to Aadhaar so that they can be monitored constantly but doesn’t want to apply the same rule to political funding. The government doesn’t want more transparency on most activities performed by its citizens.
Why not link Aadhaar to political donations? Wouldn’t it make transparent? Of course, it would. But for the reasons mentioned above, no politician would want to do that. For example, just look at a recent statement made by Goa chief minister, Manohar Parrikar on the subject. When he was asked on linking Aaadhaar to political donations at a Panaji press meet to mark the anniversary of demonetisation, Parrikar said transparency in political funding has limitations since political parties in power could target companies that gave financial assistance to rival parties in the past. "If you link big amounts to the source, there is every likelihood that the next government, if it changes hands, may target the company and the very noble idea of official donation will be driven under," Parrikar said.
What Parrikar has made is an illogical argument against bringing transparency to political funding. Going by Parrikar’s rationale, a logical question arises—What are the chances of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government too targeting donors of Congress and other political parties? Parrikar probably owes an answer to that question. Steps taken by the Modi government so far against black money—demonetisation, amnesty-like schemes, renegotiating treaties with tax havens—proves that this government wants to do something to curb black money.
What has come out of this battle so far is debatable though. But, the government’s actions lack honesty till the time it acts in a meaningful manner to clean-up political funding. Public representatives do not need so much of secrecy in their financial dealings. Instead, political parties should set an example to the public by linking all political donations to Aadhaar.



Published Date: Nov 15, 2017 11:28 am | Updated Date: Nov 15, 2017 12:14 pm