AADHAAR RELATED ARTICLES: 13915 - Aadhaar: Poor will be affected most

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

Saturday, October 20, 2018

13915 - Aadhaar: Poor will be affected most - Indian Express

Aadhaar: Poor will be affected most

There have been many cases in the past when a person has been denied benefits because he did not have Aadhaar linked to some documents.

Published: 27th September 2018 06:45 AM | Last Updated: 27th September 2018 06:45 AM

| A+A A-

Usha Ramanathan

By Arshad Khan

Express News Service

Usha Ramanathan is an independent law researcher and one of the leading critics of Aadhaar

I am disappointed with today’s verdict. I was hoping that the court would come on the side of the people. I think they have bought the marketing gimmick of the Aadhaar that it is build to benefit the poor. The biggest problem faced due to this (decision) is the people living in poverty.

There have been many cases in the past when a person has been denied benefits because he did not have Aadhaar linked to some documents. Many people even have died of hunger, and families of deceased sewage workers denied compensation because Aadhaar was not linked. Data suggest that 6 per cent of the finger prints and 8 per cent of the iris has not worked even once.

You impose a technology that is insecure, that is untested which is not working The government claim that the poor has benefitted from the programme is inaccurate and misrepresent the whole project … the majority have treated welfare as if it doesn’t come within the context of rights. The fundamental understanding that what the people of the country are entitled to , is what has been misread by the majority. I see in the judgment a continuity of their relationship. Courts are relatively independent, but they see themselves not coming in the way of the state. I have a certain sympathy with a majority of judges that they don’t get what the technologies does and what these people are behind it. We need a whole vision as what tech is doing to our life.

Today, I find many people are anxious about technology. We also know that this project was something that was promoted by the companies and used the coercive power of the state. The collaboration between the corporate and state is that the government will collect all the data which becomes an identity platform on which business will be built. The state also took the money bill root to pass the act. If money bill route is taken to cut down our liberties, then it is highly problematic. The state surveillance is not going anywhere. The court didn’t even ask about state surveillance. We raised this concern but it does not resonated with the majority.

They said that the state will keep the data safe but there have been many instances of fake ID generation. I view that point raised Justice D Y Chandrachud will open new doors for discussion about the topic in future. In our constitutional history, minority stand over the time has become the majority voice.