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, April 17, 2018

13299 - Aadhaar linking must to prevent impersonation, UIDAI tells SC


Aadhaar linking must to prevent impersonation, UIDAI tells SC by Shelley Chandler | April 14, 2018 | 15:59 

The court said there might be a need for safeguards to ensure data is held safely by "requesting entities" (the place where one is undergoing Aadhaar authentication) seeking to use Aadhaar for authentication and asked the Centre to detail statutory and proposed steps to prevent UID centres from sharing demographic details of persons enrolled in the system.

 Appearing before a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, the UIDAI countered the allegation raised by petitioners, and later taken up by the court, that insistence on Aadhaar for all stigmatises people. The remarks came when Dwivedi said that Aadhaar was not required for the government if it really wanted to do surveillance and that it would employ other means. "As of today, we do not have a robust data protection regime". "The Act does not preclude you (UIDAI) from employing such a technology", the bench said. "Purloining of data... for the goal of influencing elections in some of the most powerful nations... is an issue", Justice DY Chandrachud said, referring to the recent controversy surrounding Cambridge Analytica. "UIDAI neither has the tools to track users nor is it empowered by the law to do so", he said, and referred to provisions in the Aadhaar Act that make sharing of personal information of users a punishable offence. "We can not even tamper with the servers", Dwivedi told Justice Chandrachud, who was far from happy with the explanations. 

Now that Cambridge Analytica issue has been linked with Aadhaar, what new turn the SC hearings will take in the near term, will be worth watching. The bench also referred to the testimony of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg before the US Congress and said "you open the newspapers every day and see reports of how elections in even some of the most powerful nations were influenced". However, counsel Diwedi dispelled the apprehension that the data is being shared by the collecting entities and said these information can not be shared. Justice Chandrachud pointed out that the law says information can be further shared on prior consent. People invariably give this consent, which is in the form of a contract. Counsel said individual data by itself has no value, unless the data of all the persons are aggregated. Justice Chandrachud observed, "Today all information in Whatsapp or Facebook are commercially sensitive". Why should somebody intrude on my privacy and keep a tab over the conversation when I share a message with my wife? "Our concern is it will affect a vast number of populations and the future generation and how are we going to lay down a law". The bench gave the example that even judges in an African country can get the access to his or her chamber by using his finger prints, which are used only for the objective of the entry and the problem was that such data was being stored at a central repository. Giving fingerprints for entry into the courtroom or getting access to something is per se not wrong. Answering questions on why UIDAI was storing metadata of users, he said "it was only limited data exclusively for the goal of authentication". "Then it is liable for sharing by the collecting entities". The CJI asked Dwivedi to explain on April 17 how the Aadhar data will be protected. 

10ThousandCouple http://10thousandcouples.com/2018/04/aadhaar-linking-must-to-prevent-impersonation-uidai-tells-sc/
CLICK ON TITLE TO SEE ORIGINAL ARTICLE - Posted by
Labels: ,