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, December 4, 2018

13954 - Not Possible To Use Biometrics To Identify Dead: Aadhaar Body To Court - NDTV


Not Possible To Use Biometrics To Identify Dead: Aadhaar Body To Court

The Delhi High Court was hearing a petition filed by social activist Amit Sahni seeking a direction to the centre and UIDAI to utilise Aadhaar biometrics to identify the unidentified dead bodies.

 SHARE
EMAIL
PRINT
4COMMENTS
Not Possible To Use Biometrics To Identify Dead: Aadhaar Body To Court
A plea was filed seeking direction to use biometrics to identify dead bodies. (Representational)

NEW DELHI: 
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) told the Delhi High Court on Monday that it was technically not possible to match the fingerprints of an unidentified body with the biometrics of 120 crore people stored in its database.
UIDAI submitted before a bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice VK Rao that matching of biometrics, including fingerprints and iris, is done on 1:1 basis and Aadhaar number is required for it.
The court was hearing a petition filed by social activist Amit Sahni seeking a direction to the centre and UIDAI to utilise Aadhaar biometrics to identify the unidentified dead bodies.
The bench asked the UIDAI to bring on record the details and file its response to the plea, explaining the system as to why it was not possible to match the fingerprints in such cases with the Aadhaar database.
It also sought the reply of National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) on the plea and listed the matter for further hearing on February 5 next year.
The petition has sought a direction to the centre, UIDAI, NCRB and all the states to scan biometrics of unidentified bodies and process them with Aadhaar portal to trace any pre-existing biometric details.
Noting the submissions of UIDAI's counsel Zoheb Hussain, the bench said if it was technically not possible, how can it direct authorities to do it.
Mr Sahni, also an advocate, submitted before the bench that it was possible to use Aadhaar biometrics to identify the dead, and even missing persons were traced through Aadhaar.
The UIDAI counsel said that for matching biometrics, it required prints of all the fingers, iris scan and if they go by only one thumb print scanning, there are chances that it would match with multiple persons.
"It is not possible. There are 120 crore persons on Aadhaar. It is always done 1:1," he said.
He also referred to the October 12 order of an Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court where the investigating officer had moved the court seeking permission to compare fingerprints of a dead woman in Aadhaar database to establish her identity.
The UIDAI had told the high court that it was not at all possible to compare the fingerprints with the information stored.
Noting this, the high court had dismissed the investigating officer's plea.
Mr Sahni, in his plea, has sought directions to the centre and UIDAI to share pre-existing Aadhaar details, if already there, without any delay, with the NCRB and states for identification of dead bodies.
In case the biometrics of the "dead body pre-exist on Aadhaar portal then directions be issued to share" them with the respondents immediately for handing over the body to the family or relatives "so that respectable and dignified exit could be ensured by performing last rites by affected persons (family)", the plea said.
He has sought directions to constitute special courts for speedy disposal of cases pertaining to unidentified dead bodies under Aadhaar Act on the same day or the next day, irrespective of holiday.
A similar plea was earlier filed by the petitioner before the Supreme Court which asked him to approach the Delhi High Court where he has already filed a petition for using Aadhaar biometrics for the purpose of tracing and re-uniting missing and mentally challenged persons with their families. Thereafter, he withdrew the plea from the top court.
The plea said despite registering biometrics and scanning more than 1.22 billion citizens at the Aadhaar Portal, the database was not being utilised for the identifying bodies.
It added that thousands of unidentified bodies are recovered in the country every year.
The petition sought directions to the authorities, saying usage of Aadhaar information would not only reduce manpower, expenditure and burden on the state in disposing the unidentified bodies but could also be handed over to the families in a short span of time.
A five-judge Constitution bench of the top court had on September 26 declared the centre's flagship Aadhaar scheme as constitutionally valid but had struck down some of its provisions, including its linking with bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions clause.
4 COMMENTS
The bench had held that while Aadhaar would remain mandatory for filing of Income Tax returns and allotment of Permanent Account Number (PAN), it would not be compulsory to link Aadhaar to bank accounts and telecom service providers cannot seek its linking for mobile connections.

NDTV Beeps - your daily newsletter