Refugees in India are being denied access to essential services due to a lack of Aadhaar. UIDAI must adhere to its commitment to inclusiveness.
Bill Gates’s claim that it raises no privacy concerns is misleading. Crucial issues that have to do with confidentiality of data and state surveillance are at stake.
UIDAI chairman Ajay Pandey made a PowerPoint presentation on various aspects of the unique identity, told the bench that “for government systems, the success rate is 88 per cent, for banks it is 95 per cent and for telecom, it is 97 per cent”.
Earlier, the apex court extended the March 31 deadline for mandatory linking of Aadhaar for services like bank account and mobile numbers till the bench delivered its verdict on the validity of the 12-digit biometric number.
Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for Gujarat government, conveyed this to a five-judge Constitution bench headed by the Chief Justice of India which is hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of Aadhaar Act.
Significantly, the latest development comes a day after a pregnant woman was denied admission in a hospital in Gurgaon for not furnishing her Aadhaar card.
The Mamata Banerjee government had on Tuesday challenged the Aadhaar scheme and its enabling 2016 Act, saying Indianness has nothing to do with a particular kind of identity.
Sources informed PTI that the interim order showcased some of the complaints as examples of the violation and went on to state that Airtel and Airtel Bank had made “false statements” to “deceive and mislead” UIDAI.
The Unique Identification Authority of India has approved the blueprint presented by telcos to operationalise new modes like OTP for Aadhaar-based SIM reverification of existing subscribers from December 1.
“Special provisions granted to Nagaland under Article 371A of the Constitution exempt the state from the applicability of the Acts of Parliament in respect of the religious or social practices of the Nagas and their customary law and procedure.” the apex students’ body in the north-eastern state, in a memorandum said
“It can be challenged by individuals, but how a state has come (to court)? It cannot be done,” the Bench said.
The nine-judge bench unanimously ruled that privacy is a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India J S Khehar, comprised of Justices J Chelameswar, S A Bobde, R K Agrawal, R F Nariman, A M Sapre, D Y Chandrachud, S K Kaul and S Abdul Nazeer.
Prasanna believes that technology ruling lives can only be deemed as fair if it is “proveably so and nothing in Aadhaar has been able to convince me of that”.
Venugopal explained that “even demographic data is protected in Aadhaar…One doesn’t have to give phone number etc if they have apprehension of misuse”. Senior counsel Gopal Subramanium, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the “enrolling authority under Aadhaar were private parties and not the Government of India”.
The bench is dealing with the limited issue of right to privacy and matters challenging the Aadhaar scheme would be referred back to a smaller bench.