Revision
order vindicates position of CFCL and eminent citizens who have issued
Statement of Concern and Public Statement
Punjab &
Haryana High Court questioned
legality of 12 digit biometric UID/Aadhaar Number, Central Govt. agreed
Role of Registry of the Supreme Court crucial and
relevant for compliance with the order of Chief Justice headed five Judge Bench
UIDAI CEO shares half truths with State Govts, Media
and citizens
September 16,
2016: Responding to letters of Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties
(CFCL) to
Chief Justice of India, Union Minister of Human
Resource Development and Secretary, University Grants Commission (UGC)
and
contempt applications in the Supreme Court, UGC has “clarified that any
student
who have applied or wishing to apply for scholarship/fellowship shall
not be
denied benefit thereof due to non availability of Aadhaar No./Card.”
The revised PUBLIC NOTICE dated September 14, 2016 is available at
http://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/7
CFCL had sent the
attached letters on August 26, 2016, July 12, 2016 and 2nd July,
2016
drawing their attention towards order dated 15.10.2015 passed by the Supreme
Court of India in the ‘UID/Aadhaar’ matter, i.e. Justice (retd.) K.S.
Puttuswamy v. UOI & Ors., WP (C) No. 494/2012 and related
petitions. The order is attached for your perusal and consideration.
The circular of UGC which is in manifest violation of Hon’ble Court’s order is
available at http://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/4
AADHAAR/ UID scheme is presently under
challenge before the Supreme Court. After hearing the parties has passed a
series of interim orders starting the 23rd September 2013 and the
last of which was passed on October 15, 2015 inter alia, states as
follows.
4. We impress upon
the Union of India that it shall strictly follow all the earlier orders passed
by this Court commencing from 23.09.2013.
5. We will also make
it clear that the Aadhaar card Scheme is purely voluntary and it cannot be made
mandatory till the matter is finally decided by this Court one way or the other.
In the related
case the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (CRl) 2524/2014 Unique Identification
Authority of India Vs CBI passed an order dated 24.3.2014 which
reads as follows: “More so, no person
shall be deprived of any service for want of Aadhaar number in case he/she is
otherwise eligible/entitled. All the authorities are directed to modify their
forms/circulars/likes so as to not compulsorily require the Aadhaar number in
order to meet the requirement of the interim order passed by this Court
forthwith. Tag and list the matter with main mater i.e. WP (C) No. 494/2012.”
All the orders of Supreme Court are
still in force as per Court's order of 15th October, 2015 and they will remain
in force till the time court itself does not waive them. The Court’s order
makes it clear that UID/ aadhaar remains voluntary.
Therefore, no one can be asked to
produce UID/ aadhaar for disbursement of all Government subsidies/Scholarships/Fellows
In view of the above mentioned facts, UGC
and central government is under a legal compulsion to revise its illegitimate
and illegal orders fearing Court’s action in the face of violation of its unambiguous
order.
It is noteworthy that legality of
UID/Aadhaar has already been questioned by Punjab & Haryana High Court.
In a setback to efforts to bulldoze
UID/Aadhaar and related schemes, following the direction issued to the Union of
India and Union Territory of Chandigarh by Punjab and Haryana High Cou
The Order observes, “In
this writ petition filed as PIL, the petitioner has challenged the
vires of notification issued by Union of India for making it compulsory to have
UID Cards." It is further observed in the order that “Second
issue raised in this petition is that vide order dated 5.12.2012,
respondent No.3 i.e. Deputy Commissioner, U.T., Chandigarh has given directions
to the Branch In charge Registration-cum-Accountant, office of Registering
& Licensing Authority, Chandigarh not to accept any application for
registration of vehicle and grant of learner/regular driving licence without
UID card.”
It is noteworthy
that Secretary Government of India, Ministry of Communication and Information
Technology wrote a letter to the Secretary, Department of Defence Production
asking him to introduce Aadhaar enabled Biometric Attendance System in the
department of defence production. The system would enable an employee with an
Aadhaar number to register his/her attendance (arrival/ departure) in the
office through biometric authentication. It also says that a web based
application software system will enable online recording of attendance and that
the dash board relating to real time attendance and related statistics, can be
viewed by everyone. It is clear that this transforms a “voluntary” project into
a mandatory project.
Unique Identification
Authority of India (UIDAI), Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology
(MeitY) [formerly Ministry of Communications and Information Technology] has
been misleading the State Governments, media and the citizens.
Meanwhile, Ajay
Bhushan Pandey, Chief Executive Officer, UIDAI has claimed that “At least from
the UIDAI side, we have not said it shall be mandatory.” If it indeed true that
UID/Aadhaar is not being made mandatory by UIDAI then MeitY should
withdraw its letter to Secretary
Department of Defence Production and other departments, agencies and State
Governments. If it does not do so with
immediate effect else it will demonstrate that it is fibbing by articulating
equivocal and questionable statements.
Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties
(CFCL) had sent a legal notice to the Central Government. It responded stating,
“Aadhaar is being used for Biometric Attendance
System and this does not form part of Defence application”.
Government will have us believe that
there is no difference between “age-old attendance register” and UID/Aadhaar
enabled Biometric Attendance System. It is eminently clear that UIDAI is
sharing half-truths with State
Governments, media and the citizens.
In
order to comprehend the sophistry
involved in such averments, it is germane to recall the intervention of
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in the case wherein Indian
students in USA were made to wear radio collars. NHRC ensured that the
government acted to ensure that the human rights of students are
protected. It is germane to note that radio collar is based on biometric
data like voice print. If making
Indian students wear biometric radio collar constitutes an act which
Government of India admitted as an act of violation of human rights,
indiscriminate biometric profiling is also an act of violation of human
rights. As per Section 2 (G) of Aadhaar Act 2016, “biometric
information” means
photograph, fingerprint, Iris scan, or any other biological attributes
specified by regulations. Thus, it clearly includes biological
attributes like voice print and DNA.
If UID/Aadhaar enabled Biometric Attendance System is indeed a “digital equivalent” of “age-old attendance register”, why did NHRC object to radio collar which can also be argued by sophists to be “digital equivalent”. If the “digital equivalent” means biometric equivalent as well then it makes DNA based identity and attendance will also be deemed equivalent to “age-old attendance register”. It is quite evident that such is deeply misleading.
Coincidentally, NHRC’s views on National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 (Aadhaar Bill, 2010) helped Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance in its recommendation to trash the Bill and the biometric data based UID/Aadhaar programme.
If UID/Aadhaar enabled Biometric Attendance System is indeed a “digital equivalent” of “age-old attendance register”, why did NHRC object to radio collar which can also be argued by sophists to be “digital equivalent”. If the “digital equivalent” means biometric equivalent as well then it makes DNA based identity and attendance will also be deemed equivalent to “age-old attendance register”. It is quite evident that such is deeply misleading.
Coincidentally, NHRC’s views on National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 (Aadhaar Bill, 2010) helped Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance in its recommendation to trash the Bill and the biometric data based UID/Aadhaar programme.
The fact is that
the application of biometric UID/Aadhaar was restricted to ‘civilian
application’ and was not meant for defence application. Central Government’s Biometrics
Standards Committee had categorically stated that UID/aadhaar’s is meant only
for “civilian application” but the order on aadhaar enabled biometric attendance
system has been extended to defence employees as well.
It is evident that Central Government has
illegitimately and illegally been trying to make UID/Aadhaar Number mandatory
by making it structurally irreversible outwitting Court’s directions although
the very first promise which legally questionable UIDAI made in its UID/Aadhaar
Enrolment Form is/was that it is “free and voluntary”. Government’s notification
of September 12, 2016 also underlines it. The fact is that it is neither free
nor voluntary. It is not free because the foreign companies involved are
admittedly charging Rs 2.75 per enrolment. Central, State Governments and other
agencies have been illegally seeding UID/Aadhaar in their IT systems to make it
structurally mandatory. It is only Court’s order that has kept UID/Aadhaar “voluntary.”
Earlier government had tried unsuccessfully
to make even disbursal of judges’ salary conditional on UID/Aadhaar.
Such attempts to make
UID/Aadhaar have emerged as an act of bullying by the government agencies
and turning citizens into subjects by making right to have inalienable, natural,
fundamental
and constitutional
rights
conditional on biometric identification.
The revision of the UGC’s order by central
government ahead of the upcoming hearing in the Supreme Court vindicates the
position of CFCL and eminent citizens who have issued Statement of Concern and
Public Statement seeking halting of UID/Aadhaar project. This revision reveals
that the central government, state governments and other agencies who have been
attempting to make it mandatory have been manifestly been wrong.
Although Constitution Benches have
started sitting since January 15, 2016 after your intervention, birth of
Constitution Bench UID/Aadhaar Number case continues to experience labour
pains. Court’s website as of September 16, 2016 states that UID/Aadhaar case is
a “Five Judges Matter” but among the 10 Constitution Bench cases listed for
hearing, it finds no mention despite the fact that a five judge bench headed by
Chief Justice of India wrote, "Since there is some urgency in the matter,
we request the learned Chief Justice of India to constitute a Bench for final
hearing of these matters at the earliest". Unless these words are accorded
due respect and attention, the meaning of the words of Court will lose their
gravity.
The role of Registry of the Supreme Court in ensuring compliance of the
order of Chief Justice headed five Judge Bench is quite crucial and relevant in
this regard.
In view of the
“urgency” admitted and recorded by Court’s Bench of five judge headed by Chief
Justice of India to the biometric UID/Aadhaar Number case, it appears
inappropriate that even as the apex Court is to determine the legal status of UID/Aadhaar,
Indian residents are being coerced to accept 12 Digit Biometric UID/Aadhaar
Number as a fait accompli.
Following the revision order of
central government, there is a logical compulsion for withdrawing the letter
and all consequential letters by which UID is made applicable to defence application
i.e. Department of Defence Production in the interest of supreme national
security.
Central
Government has kept State Governments in a dark about its transnational linkages
and implications the latter are yet to realize that UID/Aadhaar project is a
grave threat to federalism as well.
Under the
tremendous influence from unregulated and ungovernable technology companies,
Central Government and State Governments have failed to safeguard national
security and citizens’ inalienable rights.
It
is possible
that such civilian and non-civilian applications are being bulldozed by
some commercial entities in order to store and read biometric and DNA
script of Indian population in the aftermath of the sequencing of
Human Genome for epigenetics, medicine, big data, social control, inheritance, eugenics and genetic determinism.
Human Genome for epigenetics, medicine, big data, social control, inheritance, eugenics and genetic determinism.
For
Details:
Gopal Krishna, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL)*, Mb: 09818089660, 08227816731,
E-mail-1715krishna@gmail.com
+ comments + 1 comments
Great post sir!
Finally found my aadhar status by name on your website after looking for so long.
Post a Comment