Abstract-:
The paper is an attempt to reflect the notion of the Aadhar act with particular reference to privacy, as well as various standpoint of the right to privacy in India. The right to privacy is one of those rights that arose after the extension of the scope of Article 21, Article 21 and many other provisions of the constitution.
Private sector actors might additionally menace the right to privacy. Moreover currently, questions have arisen concerning the utilization of non-public information for targeted advertising, sharing information with external parties and reusing personal data within big data by large technology giants, like Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Yahoo. These problem square robust by scandals, revealing the recent instance of whatsapp Pegasus spyware attack developed by Israeli software was using personal data, illegitimately obtained through whatsapp to govern and influence giant team of individuals, including during the 2019 Loksabha elections .The right to privacy can be used as legal ammunition to protect the privacy of individuals.
The Aadhar regime was launched without any legal support and, therefore, even after several changes to the law, it cannot achieve its purpose. There is now a question about whether the rights to privacy law can coexist with the current capabilities of intelligence agencies to access and analyze practically every detail of an individual’s life.
Keywords- fundamental Right,Right to privacy, constitution of India, challenges, online security
- INTRODUCTION
Privacy is a constitutionally preserved right which emerges mainly from the guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution[1]. Components of privacy also arise in varying contexts from the other strand of freedom and dignity recognized and guaranteed by the fundamental rights contained in the constitution of India.
According to SC verdict, privacy is the constitutional crucial of human dignity. It has both normative and descriptive function. At a normative level, privacy serves those eternal values upon which the guarantees of life, liberty and freedom are constructed. At a descriptive level, privacy suggests a bundle of entitlements and interests which lie at the foundation of ordered liberty.
As per Supreme Court the definition of privacy includes-:
- Safeguarding of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, home and sexual orientation.
- Protection of individual autonomy, recognizes the ability of the individual to control vital aspects of his or her life
- Personal choices to lead a way of life are intrinsic to privacy.
Privacy is not renounce when a person is in public place
By being in public place doesn’t mean an individual has renounce privacy, even as the legitimate supposition of privacy may vary from the intimate zone to the private zone and from the private to the public sphere[2].Privacy is bind to the person since it is an essential aspect of the dignity of the human being.Even though projected matter is of national interest mainly there is a right infringement complied with it. In The lights of judicial decisions passed right to privacy is protected as an inherent part of life and personal liberty express under Article 21 of Indian Constitution.
Article 21 provides that[3] -:
Protection of life and personal liberty:“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”[4]So there is no procedure established by Law to interfere with one’s private space unless if it is done for spying, surveillance purposes etc.
- DRAWBACKS OF AADHAAR ACT.
- CONCENTRATION OF POWER ISSUES
Aadhaar card is directed and operated by the pre-eminent Authority of the country, which can lead to several centralization problems. As the Government is free to control and create new unorthodox rules which can create problem for the population that might affect the entire nation.
- DISSIPATE IN BANK TRANSACTION AND BANKING SYSTEM
As Aadhaar directs everyone to link their bank account with the Aadhaar card, whichcan lead the way to some serious issues, as already discussed that Aadhaar is linked to bank accounts therefore, if Aadhaar information is leaked or misused then this can lead to serious problem/s for the bank account holders, ATM & Credit card holders & Online Banking Customers too[5].
Aadhaar keep all bio-metric detail and residential information of each individual in the country. Now as per the government rules, this information is linked with users all banks, voter Id, PAN card etc. Imagine if all this user information is leaked or used for deceptive purposes by the government.
We can’t deny that the majority of Government officers are indulge in corruption and won’t mind manipulating information to citizens for some extra income. Tails are leaked or misused in any way the banking system in India is thus becoming extremely complex network, Complex systems however increases various kind of risks which thus disproportionately to the increase in the complexity. It is thus evident that our policy makers thus neither have time nor any propensity in order to apply themselves to the implications of their actions nor also to seek any advice to protect the nation and its assets.
- FOREIGN GRIPPING
Aadhaar Project managed by foreign private companies. This project was initiated by the companies which work for development and research study. However they are still involved in handling all the data and information of The Indian citizen, which they can use for anything anytime As the Aadhaar card data is maintained by Private companies therefore, they can use this data to entertain those foreign companies. This will lead to Data gain to the foreign companies & hence compromise the privacy of the individuals.
- UNEASY TO USE
More than 30% populations of Indian are illiterate, and can’t understand or operate properly using an Aadhaar card. There are several rural areas in the country, where Aadhaar card centers or offices are not there.
Individual Information May be compromised: keeping a record of biometrics of a person (Finger Prints & Iris) connected with 12 digits numerical. it is associated with various important id’s(Passport, License, Ration Card, etc. as discussed). The data and information of the individual regarding the same can be compromised, if it is not handled properly.. This is one of the biggest risks going forward with the Aadhaar card, as we know that most of the government officials are corrupt & they won’t mind manipulating people’s information for some extra incomeBut in the midst of all this, the authorized order to possess an Aadhaar card reveals a delicate but simple fact that concerns our identity as Indian citizens despite having an identity card for voters, ration card, passport, driving license, PAN card and others, our identity does not yet have a concept of concrete existence. The lack of transparency, functionality and structuring in the public administration suggests how our identities have become fragile and vulnerable. Although, fortunately, unlike other states at risk of conflict, we have the right to identity sanctified by an official document, so why does it bother us so much? Yes, it’s the biggest project, too big to fail, for biometric procession and verification of identity in the world, but it’s rather
But in the midst of all this, the authorized order to possess an Aadhaar card reveals a delicate but simple fact that concerns our identity as Indian citizens despite having an identity card for voters, ration card, passport, driving license, PAN card and others, our identity does not yet have a concept of concrete existence. The lack of transparency, functionality and structuring in the public administration suggests how our identities have become fragile and vulnerable. Although, fortunately, unlike other states at risk of conflict, we have the right to identity sanctified by an official document, so why does it bother us so much? Yes, it’s the biggest project, too big to fail, for biometric procession and verification of identity in the world, but it’s rather disturbing[6].
To begin with, the purpose of privacy has become a strange, alien and aligner concept. In reality, it is exactly the opposite of the right to information. The government would not have every single detail on the lives of citizens, carefully monitored and analyzed. The idea that it will not be used against one is aberrant. Well, recently the Suvidhaa Info service, Axis Bank Ltd and Mudra had violated the privacy of Aadhaar’s card and hacked it, which later led to a cybercrime complaint against it. They have been accused of imitation and unauthorized authentication, but the fact that these data were readily available to them raises questions. So how will the government prevent the misuse of our critical information? It’s still ambiguous.
Another problem that haunts the registration for the Aadhaar card is an instance in New Delhi. Against the total city population of 17.7 million, surprisingly 19.2 million Aadhaar cards were issued. So how would government schemes work if the loss was too obvious and could not be eliminated? The Aadhaar Card scam is falling prey to its own concept, a reality that is hidden from Indian citizens.
- PROBABLE FOR MISUSE[7]
As indicated above, Aadhaar cards can be made very easily, which requires simple verification and therefore offers criminals the opportunity to easily create alternative identities. In a state where the police are often complicit in crimes, espionage and persecution, it is possible that vested interests record biometric data that corresponds to someone they want to identify as evidence. Multiple identification can be used to circumvent the limits to obtain profits from government schemes, such as getting a job with multiple names under MNREGA or getting more gas cylinders using multiple identity subsidies. Since biometric data is not used to verify identity, there is nothing that prevents a person from creating multiple cards with multiple names in different places, for example in a place for every phase of the polls … to fully understand the “joke” of SharadPawar’s realistic possibilities
- AADHAR FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OR CITIZENSHIP PROOF EFFECIVELY[8].
This is the problem of people, some respectable citizens who identify a person who has no documentary evidence of their age or address. And even the Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship. It’s just a proof of residence. If you have more than 182 days of residence in India, you can request an Aadhaar card. And Bangladesh and Pakistan were found with Aadhaar cards. … This is used by terrorists and anti-national elements to obtain a letter from Aadhaar. According to Aadhaar’s paper, there have been at least three cases where people have obtained a passport. … And they were arrested at the airport and everything else. “
- ILLICIT IMMIGRATION AND TERRORISM
The Aadhaar cards could facilitate the regularization of illegal immigrants or terrorists, which would lead to the cartelization of such practices and the exploitation of governmental facilities and would add a burden to the state. They could be used by political parties to manipulate the elections by manipulating the demography of a place. Given a little time, it will be impossible to distinguish an Indian citizen from a migrant, since all his documentation will be essentially authentic.
- UNAUTHORIZED CARD USE
Cases have been reported in newspapers where banks have contacted people who have obtained their Aadhaar cards by offering to open a bank account that would link to the card. How the bank got the information about the person, including the name, Aadhaar card number and address to send the offer to … should be a thought that will put any person paranoid.
- On how the Aadhaar system actually benefits only the IT industry[9]:
“The reason is that Aadhaar brings many benefits to the IT industry, the software and hardware industry. … When you have Aadhaar and there will be authentication in 1 million places across India, then there will be at least 1 million fingerprint devices so you can put the fingerprint to authenticate your identity. It will supply many companies to the IT sector, to broadband, to its communications so that authentication can take place, a million people can authenticate at the same time, in the same 10 seconds or something like that. So there will be replacement of those machines. … There is no doubt that there are advantages, but the point is that the benefits go to the business, not to the people. People lose their privacy. And companies get the advantage of earning a lot more money. And losing your privacy today is entering surveillance.it entering non-direct surveillance. “
- Aadhar Card and Right To Privacy – Can They Co-Exist?[10]
In its enthusiasm to add data electronically and better focus subsidies, the government cannot ignore its responsibility to protect citizens from the dangers of the cyber age.
Legislation: it is essential that the Union government promote privacy legislation that clearly defines citizens’ rights and is consistent with the provisions of the Constitution.
The government must take privacy risks into account and include procedures and systems to protect citizens’ information in any data collection system. An institutional mechanism such as the Privacy Commissioner must be created to prevent unauthorized disclosure or access to such data.
Our national IT cell must be able to deal with any cyber attack as quickly as possible. We must educate people about the risks involved and highlight examples of identity theft and fraud. The government must recognize all the dimensions of the right to privacy and respond to concerns regarding data security, protection against unauthorized interception, surveillance, use of personal identifiers and body privacy. We must take a balanced approach and ensure the implementation of global guarantees. Place for data protection and privacy.
- Government’s Interference to Privacy-:
Encroachment to Privacy sometimes initiated by Government functionaries too.
InUnique Identification Authority ofIndia(UIDAI) & And. v. CentralBureau ofInvestigation (2014)[11] .The attempt of the Central Investigation Office to access the huge database is regulated by the Unique Identity Authority of India in order to investigate a crime. The Supervisory Committee, however, stated that UIDAI was not allowed to transfer any biometrics without the person’s consent. The ruling has implications for the government’s broad biometric identification scheme, which includes access; The means or opportunities to access benefits, bank accounts and payment of taxes. Rights groups fear that personal data may be misused. The authorities want registration to be mandatory. The verdict overturns two previous sentences of the superior court according to which privacy was not considered a fundamental right. The nine-judge bank, composed of all the interim judges of the Supreme Court, was mandatory because one of the previous judgments, issued in 1954, had been issued by a bank of eight judges. During the hearing of the previous case, government lawyers put the image of the court that citizens did not have absolute rights over their bodies, which indicates that people could be forced to provide their biometric data. The IWC requires access to the huge database completed by the Unique Identity Authority of India for the purpose of investigating a crime. However, the Supervisory Committee stated that UIDAI was not allowed to transfer any biometrics without the consent of higher authorities or government bodies.
District Registrar and Collector, Hyderabad and another v. Canara Bank and another (2004)[12]In this case, the Supreme Court ruling refers to personal freedom, freedom of expression and freedom of movement as to the fundamental rights that gave rise to the right to privacy.
Govind vs. state of m.p. (1975)[13] .In this case, the SC gave verdict that the right to privacy is a fundamental right. The right was said to comprise and protect personal intimacies of the marriage, family, motherhood , etc. but it also noticed that it was subject to “compelling state subject”.
rajgopal vs. union of India (1994)[14] : the apex court said that this right is a part of right of a person to personal liberty that is guaranteed under constitution of India. It further recognized that the right to privacy can be both an actionable claim as well as a fundamental right.
In case of Kharak Singh V. State of Uttar Pradesh[15]and M.P.Sharma V. Sathish Chandra[16] it was declared that privacy doesn’t prevail under context of fundamental rights. It was overruled in the recent judgment on privacy by the Apex Court.
- Then comes this landmark judgment-:
In case of Justice K.S. Puttuswamy (Rete.) &. v. Union of India &Ors. [17]The unique identity scheme was discussed in the field of the right to privacy. The question before the court was whether this right was guaranteed by the Constitution. The Indian Attorney General has argued that if privacy is not a fundamental right guaranteed for Indian citizens, what is the point of having Article 21 which grants citizens the right to privacy, after this, the court overturned the previous sentence and granted the right to privacy as part of the fundamental right.
The protection of privacy and data can be read in various laws relating to information technology, intellectual property, computer crimes and contractual obligations.
(a) Information technology law of 2000
(b) Indian Penal Code
Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the United Nations Human Rights Declaration, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and many other international and regional treaties. Privacy supports human dignity and other key values such as freedom of association and freedom of expression. It has become one of the most essential human rights issues of this modern era.
The goal is to study the relative connection of privacy violation and its effect and how this effect affects a victim, we can see this effect through this example:
Women who are more vulnerable groups are mostly targeted by some unethical technological leaders and their lives become miserable for their inappropriate acts on them.
Social networks play an intrinsic role in today’s generation, the Internet culture and mobile databases promote the detection of private information of the people connected to them. Users are projected as a marketing sphere that knows their interests.
Taking the example of Facebook, the point about privacy issues can be very clear. This particular application encourages users to start an account by providing authentic details. In addition, the application’s default settings allow friends, friends of friends and almost all users (including outsiders) in the application to have access to basic information provided by a particular user. The modification of the privacy settings offered by the application must be done individually, such as who to add as a friend or with whom to disclose personal information. Generally, when young users, like teenagers, create online profiles, they don’t care about privacy and share as much personal and confidential information as possible. So here’s the question, will the young brigade of social network users be aware of these privacy settings and, if so, how much do they implement? Also, do you realize the intensity of these privacy issues that could create problems for you?
Identity theft, annoyance with frequent requests, online victimization, etc. These are some of the common consequences they face due to the publication of personal information without verifying the privacy settings. It has become a very common trend among young people to publish as many images as possible to attract attention and become popular among peer groups. Updating the status of the report or publishing random images is considered a trend.
India does not have specific legislation focused only on data protection. Some data protection principles are dispersed through the IT law and the guidelines are issued by RBI, TRAI, etc. One of the most important parts of the legislation that protects our data today is the Information Technology Law (IT Law). The IT law makes piracy and the unauthorized user with a computer source a crime and penalizes such illegal data access.
The decision to set up the group was suggested by UIDAI to the Supreme Court as part of the IT law, 2000, section 66-A applies and sections 500, 506 and 507 of the Indian penal code, 1860, apply. defendant may be punished for a period of time that may be extended
to three years and with fine. As per Section 77-B of IT Act, 2000 the offence shall be cognizable and bailable while if section 500 of IPC is applied for the said offence under the case of public servant is non-cognizable, bail able, compoundable with permission of the Court.
Section 29 of the Aadhaar bill states that information on the Aadhaar card cannot be made public.
But once sent, different impressions of the Aadhaar card circulate in different organizations and, therefore, are susceptible to fraud, as there are no security features.
Given that the illegal acquisition of the Aadhaar card is not just child’s play, but it is widely recognized that having a complete validation is a shocking reality and that someone must deceive the cat sooner rather than later. Before the government makes the Aadhaar card mandatory for further schemes or to acquire other means of identification, the officials must reflect on this complete passage. Maybe they can start by eliminating all the flaws and ensuring complete security proof or, otherwise, conversations about unsafe digitization in India will always continue to buzz and spread a negative impact.
Once you can easily print the Aadhaar card as often as you like and get more copies. The Aadhaar card has no particular hologram or other features that make it inappropriate as a valid proof of identity. The validation of the Aadhaar card used in passports as proof of identity or in any other place must be made by sending an OTP number, which is a process that would take a long time to verify each user. Basically, if it is not verified by the OTP number, the Aadhaar card is just another piece of paper with your name, photo
The negative content of privacy prevents the state from interfering with the life and personal freedom of a citizen and the address therein.
Information privacy is part of the right to privacy. The court noted that privacy hazards in the information age could come not only from the state but also from non-state people. Therefore, the government of the Union must examine and establish a solid data protection regime. The creation of such a regime could require a careful and sensitive balance between individual interests and legal concerns of the state.
According to the ruling, the state’s legal goals should be “to protect national security, prevent and investigate digital crime, encourage innovation and the dissemination of knowledge and avoid excessive social benefits”. These issues should be considered by the Governmental Union in the design of the data protection system.
- Judgment of 2018
The Supreme Court on k.sputtaswamys case[18]stated that the emblematic scheme of the Aadhaar center is constitutionally valid. However, the court annulled some of its provisions, including the connection to bank accounts, mobile phones and school admissions. A five-judge constitutional bank headed by the president of the Supreme Court, Deepak Mishra, argued that Aadhaar would remain mandatory to submit IT declarations and assign the permanent account number (PAN). However, it would not be mandatory to connect Aadhaar to bank accounts and even telecommunications service providers cannot search for the connection for mobile connections. Adhaar would not be mandatory for admission to school, as well as for exams taken by the Central Council for secondary examinations, national eligibility and admission tests for medical admission and the Commission for university scholarships.
The bank has eliminated the national security exception under the Aadhaar law (direct delivery of subsidies, financial services and other services). He said that Aadhaar aims to help the benefits reach the marginalized sectors of society and takes into account the dignity of people not only from a personal point of view but also from the community. The superior court has declared that Aadhaar is serving a much greater public interest. Aadhaar means unique and it is better to be unique than to be the best.
The most significant and immediate implication of the process is for those companies or private companies, which depend on Aadhaar-based customer authentication mechanisms. This is specifically a problem in the context of companies in the cutting-edge technology space that industry regulators, such as the Reserve Bank of India, must comply with KYC.
Any failure by employers to comply with the Supreme Court ruling will result in employers despising the court[19].
Finally, the ruling also discussed the bill, which is said to include many of the progressive data protection principles inspired by the general EU data protection regulation. Although the Supreme Court has recognized that there may also be room for it, it has also been noted that we are not far from a global data protection regime, which limits the confidentiality of information. These remarks, together with the extensive discussion on EU jurisprudence, suggest that the courts of India will probably depend heavily on the principles adopted in the EU GDPR in future cases, although there is no clarity on the specific principles that would be imported
The Supreme Court has categorically recognized some principles of data protection, such as the minimization of data (limitation of the collection of data to the data necessary for the established objects or purposes), limitation of the purpose (limitation of the scope of the purpose and use of only data for this purpose), data retention (data retention only for a limited period necessary for the purpose) and data security as relevant factors to determine whether the provisions of specific legislation, including Aadhaar’s law, are in compliance with the right to privacy of an individual.
While the Supreme Court has discussed several data privacy principles of US and EU jurisdictions, it has not specified which of these principles should be adopted in the Indian The e-KYC based in Aadhaar, under the Aadhaar Act, was seen as a means to achieve KYC compliance efficiently without paper. Government or industry regulatory authorities should now introduce alternative mechanisms, which should be equally effective for identifying people. In this context, it should be taken into account that the Employee Pension Fund Organization (“EPF”) issued a circular which obliged employers to link the Aadhaar numbers of all eligible employees to their respective EPF accounts. Since the Supreme Court declared that Section 57 is unconstitutional the key part of the section, as indicated in the Law, was something like this:
“Nothing contained in this law prevents the use of the Aadhaar number to establish the identity of a person for any purpose, whether from the State or any natural person or person, in accordance with any law, for the time being in force, or any contract for this purpose …
The Supreme Court has also recognized and discussed a number of provisions of the bill, again without much clarity about which of these principles should be imported.
The Supreme Court had to assess primarily whether the provisions of the Aadhaar Law were contrary to the right to privacy, which the Supreme Court established as a fundamental right in 2017. In this regard, it is important to note that a number of services provided by private entities and Government officials depended on an individual who linked their Aadhaar number for authentication, which indirectly forced most people to get an Aadhaar number. Therefore, the problem was not so much if it was a violation of the right to privacy, but if it was a reasonable exception. The Supreme Court has declared that the right to privacy cannot be harmed without a just, just and reasonable law. This required the existence of a law, which serves a legitimate state objective and is proportional to the objective pursued. The Supreme Court also clarified that the proportionality test includes the following four aspects
Legitimate objective: the measure that limits the right must have a legitimate objective.
Rational link: it must be an appropriate means to promote the goal.
Need: there should not be a less effective but equally effective alternative.
Balance: the measure should not have a disproportionate impact on the rights holder.
The Supreme Court annulled or read some parts of Aadhaar’s law, which did not comply with the previous proportionality test. However, apart from these provisions, the Supreme Court held that the Law of Aadhaar, in general, as a law, satisfies a legitimate state objective and is proportionate, making it a reasonable exception to the right to privacy.
Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act, which makes the Aadhaar number mandatory for receiving subsidies, benefits and services from the government (for which expenses were taken from the Consolidated Fund of India), was considered valid. However, the most relevant provision that has been read The Court has taken note of section 57 of the law of Aadhaar. This
“Aadhaar’s law is unconstitutional, employers are no longer allowed to collect a number of Aadhaar employees to link them to their EPF accounts.
The provision allowed government entities, companies and individuals to use the Aadhaar number to establish a person’s identity for any purpose, in accordance with any law or contract.
- First, the Supreme Court held that the phrase “any purpose” is not proportionate, too broad and subject to abuse. The Supreme Court ruled that the purpose must be “supported by the law”.
- Secondly, the possibility of collecting and using Aadhaar numbers for authentication under a contract has been rejected, as this could entail the obligation for people to express their consent in the form of a contract for a purpose unjustified. . The Supreme Court has ruled that the contract must be “supported by the law”.
Third, private entities cannot use Aadhaar numbers for authentication purposes, based on a contract with the person in question, as it would allow the commercial exploitation of a person’s biometric and demographic information through private parties. . This effectively prevents companies from using the Aadhaar-based e-KYC authentication of an individual’s identity, which was primarily the way many companies met their customers’ relevant knowledge requirements (KYC). This report analyzes the evidence adopted by the Supreme Court, in particular in relation to an individual’s right to privacy, to achieve the above conclusions. It also briefly analyzes approved orders against existing requirements for mandatory binding of Aadhaar numbers. Finally, the report analyzes the data protection principles recognized by the Supreme Court in this ruling, in the light of the Personal Data Protection Project, 2018 (the “bill”)
- Current scenario of Aadhar act[20]
The government will have to issue a “law” to link Aadhaar to individuals’ social network accounts, said the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), as current legislation only allows the use of a unique identity for its schemes and subsidies.
In a reply to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on September 13, UIDAI stated that Aadhaar’s law allowed the use of an identity document only in schemes and subsidies financed by the UIDAI Consolidated Fund, he said that the law of Aadhaar allowed the use of the identity of the document only in schemes and subsidies financed by the Consolidated Fund of India. Therefore, for anything outside the scope of the law, a new law must be established, he said.
This happened after the superior court agreed to hear a request from the social media company Facebook to request the transfer of four disputes of public interest, pending before the higher courts of Madras, Bombay and Madhya Pradesh, on the connection of social media Aadhaar network.
“UIDAI responded that the government will need a new law for social networks to connect to Aadhaar,” a government official said. When asked if it was technically possible to link social media accounts to the unique identification number, he said it depended on the implementation agency. “” UIDAI has repeatedly stated that it is blind to the use of the number and that its use can only be made if the law permits, “the official said, requesting anonymity.
Government officials believe that such a link would not be technically feasible since the mere linking of the Aadhaar number to social media accounts would be pointless. Government authorities would need the underlying details of social network users, including the address or mobile number, which is not allowed by Aadhaar’s Law. Antony Clement Rubin, who presented GDP at the Madras High Court, trying to link the number of Aadhaar to an individual’s social networks. multimedia account, sent a request to change the original request to allow any identity approved by the government to be used to verify accounts, not just Aadhaar
Social media accounts should not be linked to Aadhaar, a senior government official told E arguing that the use of the unique twelve-digit identity number should be carefully considered due to the privacy concerns surrounding it.
In 2018, the main court limited the mandatory use of Aadhaar only to verify the permanent account number (PAN), tax returns and central government subsidies financed by the Consolidated Fund of India. This was later incorporated into the Aadhaar bill and other laws (amendment), 2019, which was recently amended to allow telecommunications and banking companies to use Aadhaar to gather information on Know Your Client, albeit voluntarily with the customer consent.
- TheAadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2019.
In September 2018, the Supreme Court removed a portion of Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act that allowed a corporate body or even an individual to request authentication via the unique identification number. The government then considered an ordinance, promulgated by the president on March 2, 2019. On June 12, the Union Council of Ministers approved the Aadhaar bill and other laws (amendment) 2019, replacing the ordinance . The mandatory use of Aadhar for processes like KYC has now become voluntary. But here is also the criticism
Viraggupta, a lawyer for the Supreme Court and a partner in the VAS Global law firm, said the Supreme Court made it clear that the information contained in the Aadhaar database should be disclosed in the interests of national security, but this should be sanctioned by a judicial authority .
“The new amendment has circumvented the Supreme Court judgment and the information on the Aadhaar database can be shared with only a mere executive order. Moreover, the decision can be taken by any secretary-level officer instead of the Joint Secretary,” he said[21].
- Conclusion and suggestion
If at any time we start using UID data to verify an individual’s identity, there is no certainty that it will work; One of the main causes of this is the risk of disclosure of personal data for unethical use. There are many other reasons. Basically, Aadhaar is a project that has generated enormous profits for many biometric database companies and elite political groups, “but it has very little to offer the common man a simple record and the cards without biometric data do not count and the card does not count It has gained enough standard to be called as a reliable source.
In reality, the entire generation of Aadhaar would in future be the victim of government control, harassment and the threat to privacy, in a way that cannot be conceived until now. It is a contrary and interrupted view of the word democracy in its essence; where individual privacy is negotiated for an official identity, which is a highly discussed and arbitrary concept
Aadhaar still has to work hard to fill the gaps, otherwise the complete systems may not be fake or a scam, which can lead to the loss of information from thousands of Indian citizens.
Based on the above analysis, I would like to suggest that voter identification is a better alternative to Aadhaar, there is a literal and meaningful logic to use it.
Now, if we look at the photo ID, it’s a unique 10-character alphanumeric string and the EPIC provides proof of citizenship. Includes photography, provides the full name, full address, gender, date of birth and the name of the father, mother or husband, and provides a unique identity with different details. Only biometrics is not there. Therefore, voter identification remains a better option for proof of identity, as is sufficient to fulfill the purpose of governmental schemes for targeted people.
[1] Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950
[2]D Y Chandrachud ,Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) … vs Union Of India And Ors.(24 August, 2017),https://indiankanoon.org/doc/91938676/
[3] Article 21 of The Constitution Of India, 1949
[4]Article 21 of The Constitution Of India 1949
[5]The Economic times, 11 questions on Aadhaar and its misuse, answered by the UIDAI,( Jan 17, 2018, 03.29 PM)
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/11-questions-on-aadhaar-and-its-misuse-answered-by-the-uidai/articleshow/62538926.cms
[6] Subhda chaudhary, Why the Aadhaar Card Is Not Safe? ,( 20 MARCH,2017) https://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/en/NewsDetail/index/8/10206/Why-The-Aadhaar-Card-Is-Not-Safe
[7]Sushil Kambampati, Aadhaar: the Indian biometric ID system has potential but presents many concerns,(14 February 2018)https://www.boell.de/en/2018/02/07/aadhaar-indian-biometric-id-system-has-potential-presents-many-concerns
[8]Aditi agarwal, Why Maj. Gen. Vombatkere has challenged Aadhaar Amendment Act in the Supreme Court; On WhatsApp and Traceability,( September 18, 2019 )https://www.medianama.com/2019/09/223-vombatkere-aadhaar-whatsapp-traceability/
[9]Ronald Abraham, Elizabeth S. Bennett, Noopur Sen and Neil Buddy Shah, “State of AADHAAR Report 2017-18,” Idinsight, 2018.
[10] Arun Kumar and updated by ClearIAS Team, Aadhar Card and Right To Privacy – Can They Co-Exist?, https://www.clearias.com/aadhar-card-right-to-privacy/
[11] UIDAI VS CBI , AIR 2014 (India)
[12] District registrar and collector vs. canara bank, AIR 2004 SC(India)
[13] Govind vs. state of MP,AIR 1975 SC(India)
[14]Rajgopal vs. UOI,AIR 1994(India)
[15] Kharak Singh vs. state of up, AIR 1963(India)
[16] M.P Sharma v sathish Chandra, SC 1954(India)
[17] K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012(India)
[18]A Sikri, Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs. Union Of India ,( 26 September, 2018), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/127517806/
[19]THE QUINT, Sec 57 Of Aadhaar Act Struck Down. Here’s What It Means For You,(26 September.,2018)
Section 57 was essentially a prohttps://www.thequint.com/news/india/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-57-of-aadhaar-act-what-it-means-for-you
[20]Surabhiagarwal, New law needed for Aadhaar-social media linkage: UIDAI,( Sep 25, 2019, 06.43 AM)
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/71285787.cms?from=mdr&utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
[21] Goutam das and sonam khetarpal, does the amended Aadhaar Bill circumvent Supreme Court’s order?,( June 26, 2019 )https://www.businesstoday.in/bt-buzz/news/bt-buzz-does-the-amended-aadhaar-bill-circumvent-supreme-courts-order/story/359166.html
