The Narendra Modi put forward a strong case for Aadhaar in the Supreme Court, telling the court the scheme saved the country Rs Rs 59,677 in the last three years. The government also said Aadhaar ensures privacy.
| Posted by Dev Goswami
New Delhi, November 19, 2017 |
The government also said Aadhaar's technical architecture ensures privacy and security (Picture for representation)
HIGHLIGHTS
- 1 - Aadhaar-DBT scheme saved India Rs 59,677 crore, govt tells SC.
- 2 - 88 per cent of population has obtained Aadhaar: Govt
- 3 - Scheme's technical architecture ensures privacy and security: Govt
Making a strong case for Aadhaar cards, the Narendra Modi government has told the Supreme Court that it could save a whopping Rs 59,677 crore through Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) scheme in the last three years by weeding out duplication and fake claimants of welfare measures.
The Centre also said 118.64 crore Indians, which is 88% of the population, had obtained Aadhaar and they used it 1,216.8 crore times for authentication purposes.
Questioning claims that linking of biometric data collected through Aadhaar to banking, mobile connections and other services was a violation of right to privacy, the government also said over 12.64 crore bank accounts were opened using Aadhaar-based e-KYC (Know Your Customer).
The assertion through an affidavit comes ahead of the SC constitution bench hearing which will determine if the mandatory rule to submit personal details including iris scan and fingerprints violate the right to privacy as argued by a host of petitioners who have challenged it.
Critics say the ID system weaves together enough data to create a full profile of a person's spending habits, their friends, property they own and a trove of other information.
'PUBLIC INTEREST'
"There is a clear public interest in ensuring that the various benefits, subsidies and services being offered by the state should reach the intended beneficiary and not to fakes and duplicates, which proliferate in the system leading to loss of crores of rupees of public money", said the affidavit of RP Pant, UIDAI assistant director general, and drafted by the body's standing counsel Zoheb Hossain.
The unique identification authority had in an earlier instance said public sector oil companies detected around 55,000 duplicate connections on the basis of Aadhaar numbers and once these connections are blocked, it would save the exchequer around Rs 35 crore annually.
The court should encourage and endorse the use of Aadhaar-based biometric identification to prevent pilferage, leakages and to ensure elimination of bogus or fake persons from the system, it said.
'HIGH LEVEL OF PRIVACY'
Seeking to allay fears of data leaks, the UIDAI said "technical architecture of Aadhaar has been structured in such a way, to ensure clear data verification, authentication and de-duplication, while ensuring a high level of privacy and information security."
The apex court in its August 24 landmark verdict declaring privacy as a fundamental right expressed concerns over inroads made into an individual's right to privacy in the digital age and called for a data protection law proportionate to the purpose for which data is collected and stored.
"Informational privacy is a facet of the right to privacy. The dangers to privacy in an age of information can originate not only from the state but from non-state actors as well. We commend to the Union government the need to examine and put into place a robust regime for data protection," the SC had said.
QUESTION OVER AADHAAR REMAINS
The nine-judge bench of SC while declaring right to privacy a fundamental right has not commented if the Aadhaar scheme was a violation of it, as contended by the petitioners. This question has been delegated to a separate fivejudge bench which will begin hearings soon.
But a minute reading of the judgment makes it clear that the bench might have left enough loopholes, through reasonable restrictions on the extent to which citizens can enjoy fundamental right to privacy, after which the scheme may have secured a lifeline.
The judges also said the right to privacy is not absolute and has certain limitations.
One of the judges, Justice S K Kaul, in the privacy judgment bench even ruled that there is no harm in seeking details in legitimate national security interest, in public interest including for scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes.
He even said that private information can be elicited for regulatory framework of tax and working of financial institutions and markets.
The bench said "the legitimate aims of the state would include for instance protecting national security, preventing and investigating crime, encouraging innovation and the spread of knowledge, and preventing the dissipation of social welfare benefits."
Petitioners including retired Karnataka High Court judge K Puttaswamy, and social activist Aruna Roy said details for Aadhaar are collected by private contractors and NGOs hired by UIDAI without any safeguard, making them prone to misuse.
They claimed empirical research shows that the biometric identification denoted for UID, namely the iris scan and fingerprint identification, is faulty and could be abused.
