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

13917 - 'All-pervasive use of Aadhaar curtailed': Supreme Court verdict on UID draws gamut of reactions - First Post


'All-pervasive use of Aadhaar curtailed': Supreme Court verdict on UID draws gamut of reactions
India FP Staff Sep 26, 2018 19:54:15 IST


The Supreme Court on Monday declared that the Aadhaar Act was constitutionally valid, though it gave the government and the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) a slap on the wrist on a number of aspects of the law. Unsurprisingly, there have been a host of reactions to the judgment, some welcoming it and others expressing disappointment.

Centre, BJP feel vindicated
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley welcomed the Supreme Court's verdict, calling it a "historic decision". At a press conference, he said it was a welcome decision that Aadhaar's concept of a unique identity number and legislation has been accepted after a judicial review. Jaitley also said that by identifying beneficiaries of the government scheme and ensuring that there were no fake, or duplicate, or non existent beneficiaries, the Centre would save Rs 90,000 every year. He also said that Aadhaar's critics should realise that technology cannot be defied or ignored any longer.

"Aadhaar is a great step forward in the use of technology in governance. It will continue to be a great benefit to the society," he said, expressing gratitude to the advocates of the Aadhaar scheme — Nandan Nilekani and Ajay Bhushan Pandey.

Arun Jaitley speaking about Supreme Court's verdict on Aadhaar at Cabinet briefing. ANI
Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was resent at the press conference,  called to brief the media on a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, also praised the Supreme Court's verdict, saying the decision is "a judgement of moment, empowering democracy, good governance, service delivery and also empowering the ordinary Indian".

"The purpose of Aadhaar is legitimate and in the State's interest. It is not a surveillance tool," he asserted.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) described the Supreme Court judgment on Aadhaar as a big victory for the "pro poor" Narendra Modi government. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said that the top court had ruled that Aadhaar was safe.
"We see it as a big victory for the pro-poor Modi government. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Aadhaar and has also said that it does not violate privacy," Patra said.

The UIDAI, too, called it a "historical and landmark judgement". "The Aadhaar verdict is a victory for the UIDAI and the Government of India and has also set the pace of India's digital destiny," the authority said. "It has been established by the judgment that Aadhaar is not for State surveillance as profiling is not possible using the minimal data that Aadhaar has. There are sufficient safeguards to disallow any abuse."

Congress welcomes move, but for different reasons
The Congress, too, welcomed the top court's decision, but this was particularly its decision to read down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act, which allowed private entities to access Aadhaar data. The party called the move a "slap on the face of the BJP".
"We welcome the Supreme Court's decision to strike down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act. Private entities are no longer allowed to use Aadhaar for verification purposes," the Congress said on Twitter, minutes after the verdict was pronounced.

Several party leaders supported the court's ruling, as well.
Congress president Rahul Gandhi praised the verdict but, once again, alleged that the BJP was using the Aadhaar scheme for surveillance rather than for empowerment.

For Congress, Aadhaar was an instrument of empowerment.
For the BJP, Aadhaar is a tool of oppression and surveillance.
Thank you Supreme Court for supporting the Congress vision and protecting 🇮🇳. #AadhaarVerdict
— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) September 26, 2018

Senior advocate and Congress leader Kapil Sibal said that if the BJP government does not bring the Aadhaar Act to the Rajya Sabha — the Act was passed surpassing the Upper House as it was introduced in the Lok Sabha as a money bill — the Congress will approach the Supreme Court again.

However, he denied that the verdict upholding the validity of Aadhaar was "not a setback as striking down the Act would have deprived the marginalised sections". "But we agree with Justice DY Chandrachud that it is a fraud (to introduce the bill as a money bill) on the Constitution."

Toon by Manjul.

'A very good, balanced judgment'
Retired justice KS Puttaswamy, one of the first to question the legality of Aadhaar, welcomed the Supreme Court verdict. "After holistic consideration, my opinion is that the majority judgment on the validity of Aadhaar Act is correct, though I have not read the whole judgment yet," the 92-year-old retired Karnataka High Court judge said. On the court upholding the mandatory Aadhaar-PAN linking, he said those who pay income tax are limited, and they belong to a separate class.
West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee hailed the judgment and said: "It is a victory of the people of this country and we are very happy... The days of the BJP government are over in the country."
Attorney general of India KK Venugopal told ANI, "I am very happy with the judgment. It is a landmark and remarkable judgment."
Amitabh Kant, CEO of the Niti Aayog, agreed that it is "a good and a progressive judgment and will bring efficiency in the country". He stressed the Supreme Court's observation that Aadhaar has stood the test of constitutionality.
Leading figures from the IT sector said that the apex court's verdict is balanced. Former Chief Financial Officer of Infosys, TV Mohandas Pai told PTI, "Overall, it is a very good, balanced judgement that recognises Aadhaar as a unique entity, empowers the government to make Aadhaar mandatory with conditions in certain cases and recognises the primacy of the individual's right to her data."
Another ex-CFO of Infosys, V Balakrishnan, said the apex court has come out with a balanced view on the issue. "The Supreme Court has, in effect, addressed many of the concerns related to the wide use of Aadhaar data and resulting data privacy issues," Balakrishnan said. "The all-pervasive use of people's Aadhaar number has been curtailed by the judgment to a large extent."
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan reacted to the Supreme Court's verdict saying that the major concerns of citizens had been taken care of, but he expressed concern with the verdict upholding the Act as a money bill.
One issue before the SC was whether the Aadhaar Act could have been passed as a money bill, thus bypassing the Rajya Sabha. Govt has been misusing the money bill provision to pass Acts having nothing to do with govt funds such as the FCRA or Representation of People Act. https://t.co/mg26G9QCFQ — Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) September 26, 2018
Former attorney general Soli Sorabjee called it "a good judgment" in providing relief to citizens and said Justice DY Chandrachud's dissent was very important. "I think that on the whole, it is a good judgment. Although personally, I am happy with Justice Chandrachud's judgment striking it down on the grounds that it bothers the right to privacy," he said.
Pavan Duggal, one of the nation's leading cyber law experts, said that the Aadhaar verdict was a huge sigh of relief for citizens, though he warned that it would now be a "humongous task to ensure that the data already with private companies is not misused or sold".
Supratim Chakraborty, associate partner at law firm Khaitan and Co, also warned that there was "need to have proper safeguards as to how information is being used by private parties"
Neel Ratan, a partner at PwC India, said the verdict "provides reasonable restrictions to ensure that citizens' consent is taken and misuse of data can be controlled, while benefits of Aadhaar can be adequately passed on to marginalised groups".
Pointing out that banks should stop issuing Aadhaar cards as it has no connection to banking, the general secretary of the All India Bank Employees Association, CH Venkatachalam, said, "As far as banks are concerned, an Aadhaar card is one more card to identify a person while opening an account. No other purpose is served beyond that."
With inputs from agencies

Updated Date: Sep 26, 2018 19:54 PM