illegal biometric identification must be stopped; UK, USA, Australia, France, China have done so
Supreme Court to hear controversial UID case on October 8
October 8, 2013: In compliance with the order of Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice B S Chauhan and Justice S.A. Bobde dated September 23, 2013 on biometric unique identity (UID)/aadhaar number for Centralized Identity Data Registry (CIDR) capturing biometric details of every resident such as iris scans and 10 fingerprints. By now central ministries should have de-linked all of its services from 12 digit biometric UID number and UID number generating Home Ministry’s National Population Register (NPR) and State Governments should have withdrawn from the MoU they signed with Planning Commission’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
But Ministry of Petroleum, Home Ministry, Jharkhand, Maharashtra and Delhi Govts decided not to do so. The Court is likely to take them to task on October 8 when the matter is scheduled to be heard. The Court is seized with several petitions against UIDAI filed from Karnataka, Maharashtra, Chennai, Delhi, Rajasthan and other states which have been bunched together. There is a case against it in Karnataka High Court as well.
Both the CIDR of biometric UID number and directly linked NPR is meant for usual residents (which is a universal set whose subset includes citizens) leads to denial of the constitutional rights to citizens of the present and future generations. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoP&NG) has filed the attached ‘Application for clarification/modification of order dated 23.09.2013” and Jharkhand Govt is also expected to do so. Notably, the application refers to UID/aadhaar number as aadhaar card illustrating how it does not want full facts to be examined by the Court.
It may be noted that the misplaced impression that Supreme Court’s order on biometric UID does not impact biometric National Population Register (NPR) as it has no link with entitlements is not true because NPR also generates UID number in 14 States and two Union Territories, which are called ‘NPR States’. This means that people in these States and Union Territories get UID numbers through the NPR. The usual residents of 14 other States, four Union Territories and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, that are under the jurisdiction of ‘UIDAI’, get UID number through the UIDAI. Since the UID number is generated under both the schemes, and in any case both the databases are going to be merged as per the terms of reference of the UIDAI, the Court ruling is directly applicable to it.
But in violation of Supreme Court's order, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas through notifications published in the Gazette of India vide GSR 718 (E) and GSR 791 (E) has made several amendments to the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order 2000 (no.10) claiming powers conferred under Section 3 of the attached Essential Commodities Act 1955 has made UID mandatory. The Section 3 of ESA 1955 gives powers to control production, supply, distribution, etc of essential commodities. It is inexplicable as to how this provides a legal mandate to link the UID number with its services. This implies denial of subsidy to those who do not have the impugned UID number, which is based on some biometric identification of ‘usual residents’, unmindful of the fact that the subsidy in question is meant for citizens. This is a case of manifest inconsistency, because it does not differentiate between a citizen and a non-citizen.
Despite UID number being legally questionable Planning Commission’s deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia is continuing enrolment for biometric UID number based on an Enrolment Form which promises that it is ‘free and voluntary’ and indulging in a sleight of hand by stating that by enrolling you give consent for it to be made mandatory through 'welfare agencies'. He is factually wrong in stating that 'There is nothing wrong with the UID arrangement" as the key issue is whether it should be mandatory. The fact is UID number is constitutionally, legally, legislatively, politically, historically, democratically and ethically wrong and the key issue is not whether it should be mandatory. The key issue is why it should not be abandoned the way it has been abandoned in USA, UK, Australia, France and China. Even European Court of Human Rights has ruled that indiscriminate collection of biometric data is legally wrong. National Human Right Commission has also expressed its written reservations against it. It has huge potential to be used by Nazi party like formations, for genocide, riots, and massacres and for assault on minorities of all ilk besides political opponents. It is an attempt take over property rights over personal sensitive information from citizens for good. It constitutes colossal and unprecedented assault on privacy and democratic rights. Ahluwalia and his subordinate officials like Nandan Nilekani will have us believe that there is nothing wrong with Orwellian architecture masquerading as solutions architecture and public information infrastructure.
The claims of the Solicitor General and Ministry of Petroleum are questionable. An undated letter (circular) of the Ministry reads, "...we will restrict LPG distribution only to those who have registered Aadhaar numbers with the distributor." This is in direct contradiction to the submission made by Solicitor General in the Supreme Court, on the basis of which a special hearing has been arranged on October 8. It is clear that it has nothing to do with the subsidy, this is about the supply of LPG itself, with or without subsidy. Meanwhile, it has come to light that individual companies have already put in place a process for continuing LPG supplies with or without aadhaar/UID number and with or without Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT), hence there can be no disruption or hardship caused by removing UID from the DBT process as envisaged by the Solicitor General.
In a bizarre move, three oil PSUs have moved the Supreme Court seeking modification of its earlier order, but before a different bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjan Gogoi for an urgent hearing, according to a report of the Press Trust of India dated October 6, 2013.
It may be recollected that Punjab and Haryana High Court bench headed by Chief Justice A K Sikri passed an order March 2, 2013 after hearing a matter challenging a circular making UID number mandatory. The moment Court raised questions of laws, the circular was withdrawn by the central government. The decision underlined that UIDAI is legally assailable and indefensible. Supreme Court order vindicates the Punjab and Haryana High Court order, report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance and the Statement of Concern dated September 28, 2010 issued by 17 eminent citizens including Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Prof Romila Thapar, SR Sankaran, Justice AP Shah, KG Kannabiran, Bezwada Wilson, Aruna Roy and Prof Upendra Baxi seeking halting of the project. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Subordinate Legislation is also seized with the compliant dated 18.3.2013 on how Subordinate Legislation for Biometric Identity is illegal & illegitimate and constitutional, legal, historical & technological reasons against UID number scheme.
For Details:
Gopal Krishna, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties, Mb: 09818089660 (Delhi), 08227816731 (Patna), E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com
Vinay Baindur, Bangalore, E-mail: yanivbin@gmail.com
Vickram Crishna, Mumbai E-mail: vvcrishna@radiophony.com
Qaneez Sukhrani, Pune, Mb: 0982205056782, E-mail:qaneez.sukhrani@gmail.com
Supreme Court to hear controversial UID case on October 8
October 8, 2013: In compliance with the order of Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice B S Chauhan and Justice S.A. Bobde dated September 23, 2013 on biometric unique identity (UID)/aadhaar number for Centralized Identity Data Registry (CIDR) capturing biometric details of every resident such as iris scans and 10 fingerprints. By now central ministries should have de-linked all of its services from 12 digit biometric UID number and UID number generating Home Ministry’s National Population Register (NPR) and State Governments should have withdrawn from the MoU they signed with Planning Commission’s Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
But Ministry of Petroleum, Home Ministry, Jharkhand, Maharashtra and Delhi Govts decided not to do so. The Court is likely to take them to task on October 8 when the matter is scheduled to be heard. The Court is seized with several petitions against UIDAI filed from Karnataka, Maharashtra, Chennai, Delhi, Rajasthan and other states which have been bunched together. There is a case against it in Karnataka High Court as well.
Both the CIDR of biometric UID number and directly linked NPR is meant for usual residents (which is a universal set whose subset includes citizens) leads to denial of the constitutional rights to citizens of the present and future generations. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoP&NG) has filed the attached ‘Application for clarification/modification of order dated 23.09.2013” and Jharkhand Govt is also expected to do so. Notably, the application refers to UID/aadhaar number as aadhaar card illustrating how it does not want full facts to be examined by the Court.
It may be noted that the misplaced impression that Supreme Court’s order on biometric UID does not impact biometric National Population Register (NPR) as it has no link with entitlements is not true because NPR also generates UID number in 14 States and two Union Territories, which are called ‘NPR States’. This means that people in these States and Union Territories get UID numbers through the NPR. The usual residents of 14 other States, four Union Territories and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, that are under the jurisdiction of ‘UIDAI’, get UID number through the UIDAI. Since the UID number is generated under both the schemes, and in any case both the databases are going to be merged as per the terms of reference of the UIDAI, the Court ruling is directly applicable to it.
But in violation of Supreme Court's order, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas through notifications published in the Gazette of India vide GSR 718 (E) and GSR 791 (E) has made several amendments to the Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order 2000 (no.10) claiming powers conferred under Section 3 of the attached Essential Commodities Act 1955 has made UID mandatory. The Section 3 of ESA 1955 gives powers to control production, supply, distribution, etc of essential commodities. It is inexplicable as to how this provides a legal mandate to link the UID number with its services. This implies denial of subsidy to those who do not have the impugned UID number, which is based on some biometric identification of ‘usual residents’, unmindful of the fact that the subsidy in question is meant for citizens. This is a case of manifest inconsistency, because it does not differentiate between a citizen and a non-citizen.
Despite UID number being legally questionable Planning Commission’s deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia is continuing enrolment for biometric UID number based on an Enrolment Form which promises that it is ‘free and voluntary’ and indulging in a sleight of hand by stating that by enrolling you give consent for it to be made mandatory through 'welfare agencies'. He is factually wrong in stating that 'There is nothing wrong with the UID arrangement" as the key issue is whether it should be mandatory. The fact is UID number is constitutionally, legally, legislatively, politically, historically, democratically and ethically wrong and the key issue is not whether it should be mandatory. The key issue is why it should not be abandoned the way it has been abandoned in USA, UK, Australia, France and China. Even European Court of Human Rights has ruled that indiscriminate collection of biometric data is legally wrong. National Human Right Commission has also expressed its written reservations against it. It has huge potential to be used by Nazi party like formations, for genocide, riots, and massacres and for assault on minorities of all ilk besides political opponents. It is an attempt take over property rights over personal sensitive information from citizens for good. It constitutes colossal and unprecedented assault on privacy and democratic rights. Ahluwalia and his subordinate officials like Nandan Nilekani will have us believe that there is nothing wrong with Orwellian architecture masquerading as solutions architecture and public information infrastructure.
The claims of the Solicitor General and Ministry of Petroleum are questionable. An undated letter (circular) of the Ministry reads, "...we will restrict LPG distribution only to those who have registered Aadhaar numbers with the distributor." This is in direct contradiction to the submission made by Solicitor General in the Supreme Court, on the basis of which a special hearing has been arranged on October 8. It is clear that it has nothing to do with the subsidy, this is about the supply of LPG itself, with or without subsidy. Meanwhile, it has come to light that individual companies have already put in place a process for continuing LPG supplies with or without aadhaar/UID number and with or without Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT), hence there can be no disruption or hardship caused by removing UID from the DBT process as envisaged by the Solicitor General.
In a bizarre move, three oil PSUs have moved the Supreme Court seeking modification of its earlier order, but before a different bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjan Gogoi for an urgent hearing, according to a report of the Press Trust of India dated October 6, 2013.
It may be recollected that Punjab and Haryana High Court bench headed by Chief Justice A K Sikri passed an order March 2, 2013 after hearing a matter challenging a circular making UID number mandatory. The moment Court raised questions of laws, the circular was withdrawn by the central government. The decision underlined that UIDAI is legally assailable and indefensible. Supreme Court order vindicates the Punjab and Haryana High Court order, report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance and the Statement of Concern dated September 28, 2010 issued by 17 eminent citizens including Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Prof Romila Thapar, SR Sankaran, Justice AP Shah, KG Kannabiran, Bezwada Wilson, Aruna Roy and Prof Upendra Baxi seeking halting of the project. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Subordinate Legislation is also seized with the compliant dated 18.3.2013 on how Subordinate Legislation for Biometric Identity is illegal & illegitimate and constitutional, legal, historical & technological reasons against UID number scheme.
For Details:
Gopal Krishna, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties, Mb: 09818089660 (Delhi), 08227816731 (Patna), E-mail:gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com
Vinay Baindur, Bangalore, E-mail: yanivbin@gmail.com
Vickram Crishna, Mumbai E-mail: vvcrishna@radiophony.com
Qaneez Sukhrani, Pune, Mb: 0982205056782, E-mail:qaneez.sukhrani@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment