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

Thursday, August 2, 2018

13804 - A defence without aadhaar - Indian Express

A defence without aadhaar

R S Sharma misses the point: All critics ask is to not make the number compulsory

Written by ARVIND P. DATAR | Updated: August 1, 2018 8:43:39 am

All the victims of Aadhaar seek is an option to exit the system if they do not choose to obtain any benefit, subsidy or service. ((Illustration: CR Sasikumar)

The article by Ram Sewak Sharma (‘Why I gave out my number’) eulogisingAadhaar when the Supreme Court judgement is pending was both improper and inappropriate. But the article having been published, a response is necessary. Indeed, the disclosure of his Aadhaar number in a tweet could be in violation of Regulation 6 of the Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations, 2016, which states that the number of an individual shall not be published, displayed or posted publicly by any person or entity or agency.

Sharma’s ostensible objective is to demonstrate that an Aadhaar number is secure and a hacking here or there is no ground to justify “scaremongering”. He implores the hackers and critics of Aadhaar to let people benefit from its technology and “go about their lives in peace”. This response is not from the hackers or critics but on behalf of millions of existing and potential “victims” of Aadhaar.

The article conveniently sidesteps the manner in which Aadhaar has been steamrolled and made applicable to every walk of life in flagrant violation of the SC’s orders. Despite a clear direction that Aadhaar could be insisted upon only for selected services, and an assurance from the government that it was voluntary, it is today impossible to live in India without the Aadhaar number. It is also pertinent to note that non-Aadhaar holders are forced to file writ petitions in high courts with a hope to get some interim relief from quoting Aadhaar in virtually every form/application.

First, if Aadhaar is indeed voluntary, and is made mandatory only for those residents who wish to avail of subsidies, benefits and services paid from the Consolidated Fund of India, then why is it being made mandatory for 48 per cent of Indians who do not avail of any subsidy or service? Is there a hidden agenda to collect and process huge amounts of data? Second, if an 80-year-old pensioner has received pension for 20 years on the basis of his pension card, why should his pension for the rest of his life be paid only on production of the Aadhaar card? Why should Aadhaar obliterate all other forms of identification that have been successfully used for decades?

Third, it is claimed that the “finest brains” have developed the Aadhaar system to deliver. Can these brilliant minds explain as to why every bank account, provident fund account, insurance policy, mutual fund be linked to the Aadhaar number? And what justifies the blocking of these accounts, paralysing the day-to-day life of Indians who have chosen not to get the Aadhaar number? Sharma talks of digital vulnerabilities but is unconcerned about the enormous vulnerabilities many Indians have faced in the recent past. In fact, a large number of Aadhaar holders are unable to get their subsidies simply because their thumb impressions do not match. Fourth, the article claims without any data, that the adoption of Aadhaar has affected those indulging in tax evasion and benami properties. This is the most ridiculous claim. Black money and tax evasion are deep-rooted and, whatever else the merits of the Aadhaar system, it will not make the slightest dent to these evils. Sharma forgets that black money is the oxygen of Indian politicals and it is significant to note that the only financial instrument given without an Aadhaar number is the electoral bond.

Fifth, it is ironic that Sharma points out that it is “neither required nor desirable to provide a copy of the Aadhaar number to various service providers”. He forgets that no Indian can get a telephone connection, an admission for his/her child even in a private school, or cremate his deceased relative without the Aadhaar card. Shockingly, one cannot enter the Tirupati temple or the Shree Dakshineswar temple at Vadodara without an Aadhaar card. Finally, an essential feature of democratic society is the right of choice. In 1974, the US made the social security number voluntary after realising the dangers of making it compulsory for every activity. All the victims of Aadhaar seek is an option to exit the system if they do not choose to obtain any benefit, subsidy or service. All they ask for is the right to live in peace and not be compelled to have their every activity monitored and recorded

Datar is a senior advocate, Supreme Court, and appeared for some of the petitioners in the recent litigation on Aadhaar

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App