To
Shri Ravi Shankar
Prasad
Union Minister of
Communications and Information Technology, Law and Justice
Government of India
New Delhi-1100
Subject- Why biometric aadhaar
and National Population Register (NPR) must be scrapped
Sir,
Although belated let me
congratulate you on taking charge as Union Minister of Communications and
Information Technology, and Minister of Law and Justice.
This is with reference to the news
report (“
Aadhaar future at stake, govt
seeks meeting with states”, Subhomoy Bhattacharjee, June 17, 2014, Indian
Express), a 35 part article series on biometric identification (
How biometric IDs can stir 'the Pot' and
lead to civil war? -Part XXXV, April 29, 2014,
http://www.moneylife.in/author/gopal-krishna.html)
and the role of Ram Sewak Sharma, the current Secretary, Department of
Electronics & Information Technology (DeiTY),
former Chief
Secretary, Government of Jharkhand and former Director General of Unique
Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
I submit that you had rightly
raised the issue of the “Sanctity and integrity of the data being collected by
the UIDAI” echoing the recommendations
of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance, Shri Narendra Modi, Hon’ble
Prime Minister of India and Shri Arun Jaitley Union Minister of Finance,
Corporate Affairs and Defence.
I submit that the scrapping of
Group of Ministers (GoM) regarding Issue of Resident Identity Cards to all
usual residents of the country of age 18 years and above under the scheme of
National Population Register (NPR), Cabinet Committee on Unique Identification
Authority of India related issues and non-renewal of contract of Raghu Raman,
CEO of National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) from Indian National Congress led UPA
era paves a new path.
I submit that the GoM in question
was supposed to examine all aspects relating to the proposal for issuing
Resident Identity Cards based on biometric identification to the usual
residents of the country keeping in view all relevant issues and finalize its
recommendations at an early date. This did not happen.
I submit that as to biometric
data collection, Shri Narendra Modi as Chief Minister had written a letter to
Dr Manmohan Singh, the then Prime Minister saying, “…there is no mention of
capturing biometrics in the Citizenship Act or Citizenship Rules, 2009”. In the
absence of any provision in the Citizenship Act, 1955, or rules for capturing biometrics,
it is difficult to appreciate how the capture of biometrics is a statutory
requirement. Photography and biometrics is only mentioned in the Manual of
Instructions for filling up the NPR household schedule and even in that there
is no mention of capturing the iris”.
I submit that Shri Sharma misled Shri
Modi by persuading to agree for biometrically profiling for aadhaar despite the
fact that Shri Modi was opposed to biometrically profiling for National
Population Register (NPR). It is also intriguing as to why was Shri Sharma was made
Secretary, Department of Electronics & Information Technology (DeiTY) ahead
of the defeat of aadhaar promoters. It is noteworthy that Shri Sharma is former
Director General of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and as
Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand he implemented aadhaar in contempt of
Supreme Court's order.
I submit that it is quite evident that convergence of NPR, UID/Aadhhar and
Census was/is meant for tracking citizens forever without learning lessons from
countries like China, UK, Australia, France and others who have abandoned such
projects on merit. Undertaking a surveillance or identification exercise on all
the citizens of India is indeed a matter of concern for legislatures,
judiciary, citizens and media wedded to public interest.
I submit that the failure of the
previous government to get the National Identification Authority of India Bill
passed, the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) on Finance on
the Bill, irregularities pointed out by in the PSC reports, the orders of the Supreme
Court and breach of trust by UIDAI in misleading Indian residents that aadhaar
is mandatory but attempting to make it mandatory reveals that the perception
about citizens’ insecurity is correct.
I wish to inform you that during
his talk at the World Bank in Washington on 24 April 2013, Shri Nandan Nilekani
as Chairman, UIDAI explained, "First of all, this is not an ID card
project. There is no card. There is a number. It's a virtual number on the
cloud, and we don't give a physical card. We do send you a physical letter with
your number, which you keep in your pocket, but the real value of this is the
number on the cloud". The February
2014 report of Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology on
Cyber Crime, Cyber Security and Right to Privacy reveals how Aadhaar
number and NPR number compromise both national security and citizens'
sovereignty for good. The database of these numbers is being stored on cloud
which is beyond India's jurisdiction. The aadhaar data is admittedly stored on
cloud. Government ignored the PSC's apprehensions on the usage of ‘Cloud computing’,
the concept of ‘shared platform’ and the risks associated with the usage of
Cloud computing in the 5th year of the implementation of Aadhaar disregarding
cyber security breaches faced in e-Governance projects.
I submit that Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance headed by Shri Yashwant
Sinha in its report submitted to the Parliament on December 13, 2011 recorded
what the Philippines Supreme Court has said in this regard:” ……the data may be
gathered for gainful and useful government purposes;
but the existence of this vast reservoir of personal information constitutes a
covert invitation to misuse, a temptation that may be too great for some of our
authorities to resist” while rejecting a similar project. The Committee
rejected the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 of the
Indian National Congress led Government and took cognizance of the possibility
of ‘manipulation of
biometric information.’
I submit that both biometric aaadhaar
and NPR are based on the unscientific and questionable assumption that there
are parts of human body likes fingerprint, iris, voice etc that does not age,
wither and decay with the passage of time. Those who support aadhaar and NPR
seem to display unscientific temper by implication.
I submit that the reason for the
vehement opposition to 12-digit biometric unique identification (UID)/Aadhaar
number project is that it is contrary to the basic structure of the
Constitution of India, which provides for a limited government and not an
unlimited government. The project is
aimed at creating an unlimited government.
As you are aware for a 21 month
period between 25 June 1975 to 21 March 1977, the country was put under
internal Emergency under Article 352 of the Constitution of India, effectively
bestowing on Smt Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister, the power to rule by
decree, suspending elections and civil liberties. This was made legal and it
remained so as long as it lasted. The powers given to her virtually had no
limits. The human body came under assault as a result of forced vasectomy of
thousands of men under the infamous family planning initiative of Shri Sanjay
Gandhi.
I submit that like Indira Gandhi,
Dr Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister enacted the authoritarian architecture
through biometric identification of Indians.
I submit that the contract
agreement is applicable to both Planning Commission’s Centralised Identities
Data Repository (CIDR) of digit biometric unique identification (UID)/Aadhaar
number which is ‘voluntary’ and the ‘mandatory’ National Population Register
(NPR) of Ministry of Home
Affairs which is also generating Aadhaar number. Notably, column number 2 in
the Aadhaar Enrolment Form on page number 1 and 2 refers to “NPR Number” and
“NPR Receipt/TIN Number” and at states “Resident may bring his/her National
Population Register Survey slip (if available) and fill up the column” number
2. The databases of both the numbers namely, UID/Aadhaar number and NPR number
are being converged “as per approved strategy”.
I submit that there is no
confusion as to why such agencies of US, France and China are eager to get hold
of the biometric database of Indians. “Biometrics Design Standards for UID
Applications” prepared by UIDAI’s Committee on Biometrics states in its
recommendations that “Biometrics data are national assets and must be preserved
in their original quality.”
I submit that the absolute faith
of the previous government in biometric technology was based on a misplaced
assumption that are parts of human body that does not age, wither and decay
with the passage of time. Basic research on whether or not unique biological
characteristics of human
beings is reliable under all circumstances of life is largely conspicuous by
its absence in India and even elsewhere.
I submit that a report “Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities” of
the National Research Council, USA published on 24 September 2010 concluded
that the current state of biometrics is ‘inherently fallible’. That is also one
of the findings of a five-year study. This study was jointly commissioned by
the CIA, the US Department of Homeland Security and the Defence Advanced
Research Projects Agency.
I submit that another study titled
“Experimental Evidence of a Template Aging Effect in Iris Biometrics” supported
by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Biometrics Task Force and the
Technical Support Working Group through Army contract has demolished the widely
accepted fact that iris biometric systems are not subject to a template aging effect.
The study provides evidence of a template aging effect. A “template aging
effect” is defined as an increase in the false reject rate with increased
elapsed time between the enrollment image and the verification image. The study
infers, “We find that a template aging effect does exist. We also consider
controlling for factors such as difference in pupil dilation between compared
images and the presence of contact lenses, and how these affect template aging,
and we use two different algorithms to test our data.”
I wish to share details of a report
“Biometrics: The Difference Engine: Dubious security” published by The
Economist in its 1 October 2010 issue observed “Biometric identification can
even invite violence. A motorist in Germany had a finger chopped off by thieves
seeking to steal his exotic car, which used a fingerprint reader instead of a
conventional door lock.”
I submit that they who supported
Aadhaar and NPR displayed unscientific temper by implication. Dr. M Vijayanunni,
Census Commissioner and Registrar General of India underlined on February 2,
2013 why China gave up a similar exercise on Rajya Sabha TV.
It is available on :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpe37lkGDkQ
I submit that the unanimous decision of 17 judges of European Court of Human
Rights dated December 4, 2008 ruled against the violation of the right to privacy
and family life by biometric profile retention in databanks, they found that
the “blanket and indiscriminate nature” of the power of retention of the
fingerprints, cellular samples, and DNA profiles of persons suspected but not
convicted of offenses, failed to strike a fair balance between competing public
and private interests and ruled that the United Kingdom had “overstepped any
acceptable margin of appreciation” in this regard. This decision is relevant
for UPA Government’s UID, National Population Register (NPR), Human DNA Profiling
and voice print through Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). The decision of
the European Court of Human Rights is available at:
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2008/1581.html
I submit that in India, NATGRID Chief Executive Officer, Capt Raghu Raman has proposed
intervention of commercial czars and creation of private territorial armies in
a a document titled "A Nation of Numb People".
It may be noted that ASSOCHAM, representing 3
lakh companies and KPMG, a Swiss consultancy have underlined the ramifications
of UID number in their report titled "Homeland Security in India"..
Union Ministry of Home Affairs, Annual Report, 2010 claims NATGRID will be started
in
2011 after "approval from the competent authority (Union cabinet)". When
Hard News, a news magazine asked Nilekani about the relationship of UID/Aadhaar
Number, his response was "No comments". The link between aadhaar, NPR
and NATGRID was part of the design. Therefore,
Government has taken the right step by deciding not to renew the contract of
Raghu Raman, CEO of NATGRID.
I submit that the way census bodies are linking biometric information with identification
of human being it seems a permanent Emergency architecture is unfolding where a
citizen is transparent before the
all mighty Government so that Government, their servant can remain opaque to
safe guard the interests of undemocratic and ungovernable social control
technology companies.
I submit that the old maxim, 'If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
fear' has been given a very public burial. Database State, a report from the United
Kingdom states, 'In October 2007, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, lost two
discs containing a copy of the entire child benefit database. Suddenly issues
of privacy and data security were on the front page of most newspapers and
leading the TV news bulletins. The millions of people affected by this data
loss, who may have thought they had nothing to hide, were shown that they do
have much to fear from the failures of the database state.' No one knows for
sure whether it was lost or sold.
Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL) has been pursuing a campaign against
the biometric based Unique Identification (UID)/Aadhaar Number, National
Population Register (NPR), National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), National
Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC), Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) and
Direct Cash Transfer since 2010. It had appeared before the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Finance that rejected the UID Bill on December 13, 2011
in its report to the Parliament. It was an applicant before the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC), which in an order date December 27, 2012 addressed to
Secretary, Union Ministry of Home Affairs communicated human rights
concerns regarding UID and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) submitted to
it by CFCL. CFCL is an applicant before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Subordinate Legislation regarding “Subordinate Legislation for Biometric
Identity Card NRIC and Aadhhar/UID is illegal & illegitimate and
Constitutional, Legal, Historical & Technological Reasons Against
UID/Aadhaar Scheme on 18.3.2013.”
It may also be noted that
Election Commission of India (ECI) has initiated efforts to make itself
biometric ready by making itself subservient to UIDAI. The new government
should inform ECI about its
decision to scarp aadhaar and NPR at the earliest.
I submit that referring to the
illegitimate advances of certain agencies trying to obtain the call records of
Shri Arun Jaitley Union Minister of Finance, Corporate Affairs, Defence wrote,
“This incident throws up another legitimate fear. We are now entering the era
of the Adhaar number. The Government has recently made the existence of the Adhaar
number as a condition precedent for undertaking several activities; from
registering marriages to execution of property documents. Will those who
encroach upon the affairs of others be able to get access to bank accounts and
other important details by breaking into the system? If this ever becomes
possible the consequences would be far messier.”
I submit that his reading about the adverse implications of the disease called biometric
identification syndrome spread by automatic identification and intelligence
companies through likes of Shri Nilekani is quite accurate.
I submit that Shri Jaitley’s comprehension
is in sync with former intelligence contractor, Shri Edward Snowden’s
disclosures. General Keith Alexander, as director of USA’s National Security
Agency (NSA) had
instructed information gathering saying, "sniff it all, know it all, collect
it all, process it all and exploit it all”. This came to light when Russia
Today made available some crucial pieces of information which was edited out
NBC News broadcasted interview of Shri Snowden on the night of May 28, 2014.
Shri Snowden observed, “The problem with mass surveillance is that we’re piling
more hay on a haystack we
already don’t understand.” This is what has been attempted by Shri Nilekani and
people like Shri Sam Pitroda through Public Information Infrastructure and
Innovations (PIII) who headed it in the rank of a
cabinet minister.
It must be noted that by
Notification No. A-43011/02/2009-Adm.1 (Vol II) dated 02.07.2009 appointment of
Shri Nilekani as Chairperson of UIDAI in the rank and status of a Cabinet
Minister was approved for an initial tenure 5 years. On March 5, 2014, Lok
Sabha election dates were announced. On 09.03.2014, Shri Nilekani officially
joined Indian National Congress without resigning from the post of Chairman,
UIDAI. He wrote a letter to the Prime Minister relinquishing the post of Chairman,
UIDAI vide ref.no. Chairman / 34/2013-UIDAI on 13.03.2014 but his resignation
as accepted on 18.03.2014 by the ‘competent authority’ in Planning Commission,
Government of India vide Notification no. F.6 [2098]/2009-Adm.I, with
retrospective effect from March 13, 2014.
I submit that Shri Nilekani has
been caught red handed in violation of the Central Civil Services (Conduct)
Rules 1964. Under Rule 5 of the Rules regarding “Taking part in politics and
elections” reads: “No Government servant shall be a member of, or be otherwise
associated with, any political party or any organisation which takes part in politics
nor shall he take part in, subscribe in aid of, or assist in
any other manner, any political movement or activity.” While implicitly and
informally Shri Nilekani functioned as a member of the Indian National Congress
from July 2, 2009 but between March 9, 2014
and March 18, 2014, he functioned totally illegally and illegitimately by
throwing all norms to the dustbin with impunity so far.
I submit that in his book which
was first published in 2008, Shri Nilekani is deeply worried because “zeroing
in on a definite identity for each citizen particularly difficult, since each
government
department works as a different turf and with different groups of people.” He
argues that “Our databases are in these disconnected silos” and states that
“NIUs would be databases that amass
information…” which will connect all these “disconnected silos”.
I submit that as Finance Minister
Shri Pranab Mukherjee announced that India has “voluntarily sought a
full-fledged Financial Sector Assessment Programme” from International Monetary
Fund (IMF) and the
World Bank in January, 2011. This is similar to the voluntariness displayed in
the drafting of Sixth Plan (1980-1985) after secret negotiations with the Bank.
I wish to draw your attention
towards a chapter ‘Extended and Specialized Lending,’ in Silent Revolution The
International Monetary Fund 1979–1989 by James M. Boughton published by IMF in
October 2001,
it is revealed that Congress Prime Minister Indira Gandhi “gave the go-ahead
to enter into secret negotiations” with IMF, following which on November 25,
1980, Shri R.N. Malhotra, Secretary, Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance
“visited the Managing Director at the Fund to signal his country’s interest in
obtaining a credit arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) that
offered the option of
longer-term credits. The first negotiating mission went to New Delhi in January
1981, led by Tun Thin, Director of the Asian Department. The then Finance Minister, Shri R.
Venkataraman, met with IMF’s
Managing Director in Washington and subsequently signed and submitted the
Letter of Intent on September 28, 1981. Following the IMF’s approval for EFF,
Indian National Congress led government faced massive criticism for subjecting
itself to IMF’s conditionality.
I submit that in an exercise of
sophistry, this Congress led government argued that “the EFF arrangement did
not impose conditionality at all, because it was fully consistent with the
policies that were already incorporated in the Sixth Five-Year Plan” and after
having internalized the conditionality imposed by IMF, Mrs Indira Gandhi
informed the Parliament that “the arrangement does not force us to borrow, nor
shall we borrow unless it is for the national interest. There is absolutely no
question of our accepting any programme which is incompatible with our policy,
declared and accepted
by Parliament. It is inconceivable that anybody should think that we would
accept assistance from any external agency which dictates terms which are not
in consonance with such policies.” This IMF publication unequivocally
establishes that Mrs Indira Gandhi lied to the Parliament and misled the
nation.
Based on perusal of official documents, I wish to take the opportunity to also submit
that biometric aadhaar based Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) is being
created with an ulterior motive to bring it under the financial sector
surveillance program of the IMF, World Bank Group in continuation of the
policies pursued since the days of Mrs Indira Gandhi. These policies have made
India servile to the dictates of the Bank. GSTN helps the World Bank Group to
make deeper inroads and erode the financial sovereignty of the country in complicity
with the ministers of the Congress party. The new
government must reverse this trend in national interest.
I submit that Foreign Policy
magazine of the Washington Post Company listed Shri Nilekani, apparently a
protégé of Shri Mukherjee as one of the Top 100 Global Thinkers in 2010. This
was prior to disclosures
about invasion of privacy by intelligence agencies of USA and UK by monitoring
emails, web searches, and telephone records. And the disclosures by Wikileaks
about the keen interest of US administration
in the aadhaar project. It appears that Shri Nilekani undertook their task by
collating biometric data of India. It is admitted his well wishers like the
President of World Bank have volunteered his services
to other developing countries as well. This was done in April 2013 at World
Bank in Washington.
I submit that in October 2012, in an interview with McKinsey & Company,
Shri Nilekani said, “Our goal, our vision, is by 2014 to have at least half a
billion people on the system, which will make it one
of the world’s largest online ID infrastructures. So that’s one metric of
success. The second is we’d like to see two or three major applications that
use this ID infrastructure. One of them is electronic benefit transfer, where
governments will pay pensions, scholarships, or whatever entitlements by cash.
And the third is [that] the mobile industry will use [the ID infrastructure]
for verification”. He added, “In the US,
to me, the two big examples are the Internet, which was originally conceived as
a defense project, and GPS. Again, it was a defense project. Both these things,
though they began as [part of] a government defense infrastructure, today are
the basis for huge innovation.” Shri Nilekani was/is aware that the substratum
of the “world’s largest online ID infrastructures” is Internet which is in
total control of US Government and US companies.
I wish to inform you that in
reply to the RTI application for copies of contracts with foreign companies,
UIDAI at last agreed to share the because "contractual obligation in
respect of BSP (Biometric Solution
Provider) contracts has expired. Therefore, UIDAI has no objection in sharing
the following contract details :- a) Copy of contract of UIDAI with M/s L1
Identity Solutions for Biometric Technology; and
b) Copy of contract of UIDAI with M/s Accenture for Biometric Technology" After examining these documents I wrote to
UIDAI submitting that with regard to the M/s Accenture for Biometric
Technology, I noticed that the first 237 pages appear to be in order but after
that there is a one pager titled Annexure J Technical Bid Technical Bid as
submitted by M/s Accenture Services Pvt Ltd. The Technical Bid document is missing.
After that there is a one pager titled Annexure K Commercial Bid as submitted
by M/s Accenture Services Pvt Ltd. The Commercial Bid document is missing.
With regard to the M/s L1
Identity Solutions for Biometric Technology, I noticed that the first 236 pages
appear to be in order but after that there is a one pager titled Annexure I
Non-Disclosure Agreement
as submitted by M/s L1 Identity Solutions Operating Company Private Limited.
But this document is missing. After that there is a one pager titled Annexure J
Technical Bid as submitted by M/s L1 Identity
Solutions Operating Company Private Limited. The Technical Bid document is
missing. After that there is a one pager titled Annexure K Commercial Bid as
submitted by M/s L1 Identity Solutions Operating
Company Private Limited. The Commercial Bid document is missing. These very
pages were missing from the contract agreement of Ernst and Young as well. Also
its pagination was not in order.
I also wrote to CIC responding to
their letter dated September 10, 2013 stating that their reasoning for sharing
the document due to "contractual obligation in respect of BSP (Biometric
Solution
Provider) contracts" having expired is flawed in the light of the previous
judgment of Central Information Commission (CIC). Under the Right to
Information (RTI) Act, the Public Information Officer (PIO) cannot deny
information citing commercial confidence for agreements between a public
authority and private party. While giving this judgment, CIC said “The claim of
'commercial confidence' in denying
access to agreements between private parties and the masters of the public
authorities—citizens—runs counter to the principles of the Right to
Information.
“Any agreement entered into by
the government is an agreement deemed to have been entered into on behalf of
and in the interest of ‘We the people’. Hence if any citizen wants to know the
contents of such an agreement he is in the position of a principal asking his
agent to disclose to him the terms of the agreement entered into by the agent on
behalf of the principal. No agent can refuse to disclose any such
information to his principal,” the CIC said in its order dated 27 July 2009. An
appeal for getting the missing pages has been filed by Col. Mathew Thomas and
Qaneez Sukhrani who had filed the RTI applications, the former had asked me to
appear on his behalf.
I submit that there is a need to
examine the minutes of the admitted meeting between Mongo DB and UIDAI. It was
evident from one of the RTI replies that UIDAI had given tasks to some company
with whom it had no contract agreement. Its sounds like the R&D Centre of
Bhopal which was operated by Union Carbide Corporation without permission based
on "recognition"
I urge you to set up an inquiry
commission to ascertain whether or not Internet that remains a defense project
deeply allied with USA’s National Security Agency (NSA) is structurally linked
to biometric
aadhaar, National Population Register (NPR), PIII and GSTN. It is not without
reason that Shri Nilekani maintained a deafening silence amidst NSA’s
surveillance on Indian ministers and officialdom. In
such a backdrop, it does not seem strange that PMO under the previous regime
has withheld the correspondence it had with Shri Nilekani all through his
tenure. The commission must unearth the players who wish to create and function
through a fiction of private company with public purpose and profit making as
the motive but not profit maximizing called NIU like GSTN.
Kindly allow me to take the
opportunity to submit that the Ministry of Defense must order a probe into the
circumstances under which Admiral Nirmal Kumar Verma who as the Chief of the
Naval Staff of Indian Navy, from 31 August 2009 to 31 August 2012 and as
Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee got himself biometrically profiled on 18
August 2011 for aadhaar number. It must be examined whether he took the
permission of Ministry of Defence before subjecting himself to the ignominy of
being biometrically profiled. It is noteworthy that in November 2012, Admiral
Verma was appointed as the High Commissioner to Canada. The probe must examine
whether or not Admiral Verma’s biometric profile is available with Canada’s
Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC), which is part of the
intelligence sharing alliance comprising of US, UK, Australia, Canada, New
Zealand and France. In a seemingly unrelated development, Shri Nilekani was
awarded an honorary Doctor of Laws degree by the Rotman School of Management at
the University of Toronto, Canada on 31 May 2011.
I submit that Shri Nilekani was given ID Limelight Award at the global summit
on automatic identification ID WORLD International Congress, 2010 in Milan,
Italy on November 16, 2010 wherein Safran Morpho
(Safran group) was a key sponsor of the ID Congress. Its subsidiary, Sagem
Morpho Security Pvt Ltd has been awarded contract for the purchase of Biometric
Authentication Devices on 2 February 2011 by the
UIDAI. Earlier, on 30 July 2010, in a joint press release, it was announced
that “the Mahindra Satyam and Morpho led consortium has been selected as one of
the key partners to implement and deliver the
Aadhaar program by UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India).” This
means that at least two contracts have been awarded to the French conglomerate
led consortium. Is it a coincidence that Morpho (Safran group) sponsored
the award to chairman, UIDAI and the former got a contract from the latter?
It is noteworthy that Shri Tariq Malik, the then Deputy Chairman of Pakistan’s
National Database Registration Authority (NADRA) was given the ID Outstanding
Achievement Award on November 3, 2009 in Milan at the eighth ID WORLD
International Congress. In an interview, Shri Julian Assange, founder of
WikiLeaks informed Imran Khan, a noted politician from Pakistan about the grave
act of omission and commission. Shri Assange said, “…we discovered a cable in 2009
from the Islamabad Embassy. Prime minister Gilani and interior minister Malik
went into the (US) embassy and offered to share National Database and
Registration Authority (NADRA) – and NADRA is the national data and
registration agency database. The system is currently connected through
passport data but the government of Pakistan is adding voice and facial
recognition capability and has installed a pilot biometric system as the
Chennai border crossing, where 30,000 to 35,000 people cross each day. This
NADRA system is the voting record system for all voters in Pakistan. A front
company was set up in the United Kingdom – International Identity Services,
which was hired as the consultants for NADRA to squirrel out the NADRA data
for all of Pakistan. What do you think about that? Is that a…? It seems to me
that that is a theft of some national treasure of Pakistan, the entire
Pakistani database registry of its people.”
It must be noted that NPR is
being prepared by Shri C Chandramouli, census commissioner & registrar
general of India, is meant to create resident identity cards is exactly like
Pakistan’s version of biometric exercise for citizens’ identity card which was
completed by NADRA, ministry of interior, Government of Pakistan and their
database has been handed over to US Government.
I submit that Dr M Vijayanunni,
former Census Commissioner and Registrar General of India underlined had
explained reasons for China giving up a similar exercise on Rajya Sabha TV on 2
February 2013.
In view of the above, if previous government’s initiatives including are not
reversed and the individuals involved are not held liable and accountable in an
exemplary manner for their illegal and illegitimate conduct and creation of
questionable institutional entities, it will set a very bad precedent for ever.
I will be happy to share
documents and references which have been cited above.
Thanking You
Yours Sincerely
Gopal Krishna
Citizens Forum for
Civil Liberties (CFCL)
Mb: 08227816731,
09818089660
