AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 13478 - Supreme Court directs Centre to file its response to pleas seeking live streaming of court proceedings

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

Monday, May 7, 2018

13478 - Supreme Court directs Centre to file its response to pleas seeking live streaming of court proceedings - First Post

Supreme Court directs Centre to file its response to pleas seeking live streaming of court proceedings

India PTI May 03, 2018 22:31:11 IST

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre to file its response to pleas seeking live streaming, video recording or transcribing of judicial proceedings in courts.

While seeking the Centre's response within four weeks on the PIL filed by senior Indira Jaising, a bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was irked over the contents of a similar petition filed by Mumbai-based lawyer Mathews Nedumpara.

"How can you make such kind of allegations against the judges of the Bombay High Court? This is totally uncalled for," the bench, also comprising justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, said.

"Heard. Dismissed. Your (Nedumpara) petition is dismissed. Now, you just stop...Enough. Enough," the bench said when the lawyer did not stop arguing even after the order was passed.

When Nedumpara referred to the campaign for transparency in judiciary on social media including WhatsApp, Justice Chandrachud said, "Now, you have talked about social media. Recently, I have come across a message being circulated on WhatsApp that you have made a Bombay High Court judge a party in a case... how can you do this? This is contempt of court."

The practice of filing such petitions should must stop and this is the reason, this petition has been dismissed, the bench said, adding that the Bar is the protector of judges.

Attorney General KK Venugopal, who has been asked to assist the court, also supported the dismissal of petition filed by Nedumpara by saying, "If a person has come to the court with unclean hands, then he should withdraw the petition and file a fresh petition."

On the issue of live streaming or video recording of court proceedings, the top law officer said that in various countries this practice has been accepted and submitted that the Centre be given four weeks' time to file its counter affidavit in the PIL filed by Jaising.

The bench said that there should be brief submissions in behalf of lawyers and in Canada, advocates are given fixed time to finish their arguments and fixed the plea for hearing in July.

Earlier, the court had sought assistance of the Attorney General on the batch of petitions seeking live streaming, video recording or transcribing the judicial proceedings.

Jaising, in her plea, has sought live streaming of matters of constitutional and national importance such as Aadhaar.

In a bid to bring in transparency, the top court had last year allowed the installation of CCTV recording with audio in trial courts and tribunals of each state.

Jaising has said that the citizens have the right to information and matters of constitutional and national importance can be live-streamed.

She has said in western countries, this system is in place and live streaming of court proceedings, including that of the International Court of Justice, are available on YouTube.

If live streaming of the top court's proceedings is not possible, then alternately video recording should be allowed, she said.

Jaising has said that with the top court hearing Aadhaar and other matters of great significance to the people, the proceedings can be live-streamed.

She said live streaming of Supreme Court cases of constitutional and national importance having an impact on the public at large, will empower and provide access to citizens who cannot personally come to the court due to socio-economic constraints.

The apex court may place restrictions on such videography and live streaming of proceedings, in cases where there are "countervailing interests of privacy as in family law cases, criminal law cases, as well as in the interests of witness testimonies in criminal matters", she said.

Another petition, filed by advocate Nedumpara, has sought video and audio recording of the court proceedings for enhanced transparency and greater accountability. This was dismissed on Thursday.

A petition, filed by a law student, has also sought a direction for setting up live streaming rooms within the apex court premises and granting access to legal interns.

The plea, filed by Swapnil Tripathi, a student of National Law University in Jodhpur, has asked for requisite guidelines to facilitate witnessing of proceedings for the interns.

Updated Date: May 03, 2018 22:31 PM