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, December 29, 2017

12572 - Ayodhya to Memorandum of Procedure, Supreme Court battles could have political echoes p- Indian Express


Outside the courtrooms, allegations of judicial activism, and run-ins of the judiciary with the legislature and executive, can be expected to continue.

Written by ANANTHAKRISHNAN G | Updated: December 27, 2017 12:33 am

2018 promises to be another action-packed year for the Supreme Court — cases with major political and social ramifications are listed for hearing, apart from an expected flood of public interest litigation (PIL). Attempts to rein in alleged judicial corruption, and to bring about greater transparency in appointments to the higher judiciary through implementation of the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), and allowing audio and video recording of proceedings, will be closely watched. Outside the courtrooms, allegations of judicial activism, and run-ins of the judiciary with the legislature and executive, can be expected to continue.


Ayodhya
On February 8, a three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra will commence hearing on appeals against the September 30, 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court that ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site, giving a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara sect, the Sunni Central Wakf Board, UP, and Ramlalla Virajman, the infant Lord Ram who sits where he was placed under a tarpaulin canopy by the kar sevaks who demolished the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992. 

On May 9, 2011, the apex court had stayed the operation of the order during the pendency of the appeals, and ordered status quo at the disputed site and adjoining 67.7 acres of land acquired by the Centre in 1993. The proceedings will likely provoke political posturing, and could impact the campaign for the state elections in 2018, as well as the Lok Sabha election of 2019.

A batch of petitions is pending in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Aadhaar Act and the government’s decision to link bank accounts, mobile phone numbers and other services to Aadhaar, and to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing benefits of various welfare schemes of the state. The petitioners have argued that Aadhaar infringes upon citizens’ fundamental right to privacy. They have alleged that making it mandatory, even though the Act says it will be voluntary, opens the door to unauthorised surveillance.

 According to the petitioners, Aadhaar’s use of biometric details like fingerprints and iris scans violates bodily and informational privacy, and carries with it the possibility of the collected data being misused. The government has, however, contended that Aadhaar is needed to plug leaks in state subsidy programmes, and to check corruption and black money. The first petition challenging Aadhaar was filed in 2012, long before the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 was notified. The petition was referred to a Constitution Bench in 2015, and a five-judge Constitution Bench was set up this year. The final hearing on the petitions will begin on January 17, 2018.

Living Will
The Supreme Court will deliver its verdict next year on whether a person can be allowed to execute a Living Will, and on the question of legalising passive euthanasia. Also known as an advance directive, a Living Will is an instrument that tells a physician in advance what end-of-life medical care the executors of the Will have chosen for themselves. It helps the individual control and influence decision making on his/her healthcare in situations in which he/she cannot make or communicate such decisions. The petitioner NGO Common Cause has pleaded that the right to execute a Living Will is associated with the right to privacy and right to life and personal liberty, and argued that it is legal in many countries. It has contended that allowing such a Will with necessary safeguards would enable people to opt for death without prolonging their suffering. The Centre has said that it is already vetting a draft law to allow passive euthanasia, but that it is opposed to allowing Living Wills because of the scope for their misuse.