Aadhaar Verdict (2018)

In a significant move, the SC constitution bench (5 Jugde [4:1]) struck down several provisions in the Aadhaar Act on September 2018.

Aadhar making India a Surveillance state?

  • The Court has held that the architecture of Aadhaar, as well as the provisions of the Aadhaar Act, do not tend to create a surveillance state.
  • During the enrolment process, minimal biometric data in the form of iris and fingerprints are collected. The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), does not collect purpose, location or details of the transaction. Thus, the purpose of the transaction is not stored.
  • The information collected remains in silos (protected). The information is not accessible in combined form. The requesting agency (like banks and the Income Tax Department) is provided an answer only in ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ about the authentication of the person concerned.
  • SC struck down Regulation 27 which provided for archiving transaction data for five years. SC has said that authentication logs should be deleted after six months.

Aadhar and Privacy

  • The Court ruled that the Aadhar Act passed the test laid down in the Privacy judgment (Puttaswamy  case) to determine the reasonableness of the invasion of privacy.
  • It held that the Aadhaar scheme is backed by the statute, i.e. the Aadhaar Act.
  • It also serves legitimate State aim i.e. to ensure that social benefit schemes reach to the deserving community.
  • The Court noted that the failure to establish the identity of an individual has proved to be a major hindrance for successful implementation of those programmes as it was becoming difficult to ensure that subsidies, benefits, and services reach the intended beneficiaries in the absence of a credible system to authenticate the identity of beneficiaries.
  • It also noted that while the challenge to Aadhaar Act is on the basis of dignity as a facet of right to privacy under Article 21, the rationale behind Section 7 of the Aadhaar act( which makes Aadhar mandatory for Government Benefits) is to ensure that right to life of marginalized are protected by ensuring that they get the benefits of welfare schemes. 
  • Majority judgment held that the Aadhaar Act has struck a fair balance between the right of privacy of the individual along with the right to life of the same individual as a beneficiary of government benefits.

Aadhar as the Money Bill

  • The Court upheld the Lok Sabha Speaker's decision to recognize the Aadhar Act as the Money Bill.
  • The Court held the reasoning that the main objective of Aadhaar Act is to extend benefits in the nature of aid, grant, or subsidy to the marginalized sections of the society with the support of Consolidated Fund of India.

Aadhar for Services

  • SC upheld the Aadhar for government services by using the Doctrine of Proportionality.
    • The doctrine of Proportionality postulates that the nature and extent of the State’s interference with the exercise of a right must be proportionate to the goal it seeks to achieve.
  • The Court upheld the validity of Section 7 of the Act stating that the rationale behind Section 7 is to ensure targeted delivery of services, benefits, and subsidies which are funded from the Consolidated Fund of India.
  • This has been done keeping in view the larger interest to ensure social and economic justice, to eliminate inequality and to ameliorate a lot of the poor and the Dalits. Some such schemes are PDS, scholarships, mid-day meals, LPG subsidies, etc.
  • The court held that it is convinced that the purpose of the provision is to ensure that such benefits which help to achieve the right to life, reach the deserving. 
    • Actions by CBSE, NEET, JEE and UGC requirement of Aadhar for the scholarship shall not be covered under Section 7 unless it is demonstrated that the expenditure is incurred from Consolidated Fund of India.
  • A benefit which is earned by an individual (e.g. pension by a government employee) cannot be covered under Section 7 of the Act, as it is the right of the individual to receive such benefit.

Disclosure of Data Disclosure and Data Protection

  • On the protection of biometric data, the court held that there are sufficient authentication security measures in place.
  • During authentication, no information about the nature of transaction etc. is obtained.
  • The UIDAI has mandated the use of Registered Devices (RD) for all authentication request. 
  • The machinery which the UIDAI has created for data protection, it was of the view that it is very difficult to create the profile of a person simply on the basis of biometric and demographic information.
  • Court also ordered the government to bring out a robust data protection regime on the basis of recommendations of Justice B N Sri Krishna Committee report.
  • The court struck down Section 33(2) of the Aadhar Act which allows disclosure of information of a user in the interest of national security.
  • SC struck down Regulation 26(c), Aadhaar Regulations which allowed UIDAI to store metadata relating to Aadhar based authentications or authentication history for private firms.

Aadhar for Children

  • For the enrolment of children under the Aadhaar Act, it would be essential to have the consent of their parents/guardian.
  • On attaining the age of 18, such children who were enrolled under Aadhaar with the consent of their parents will have the option to exit from the Aadhaar project.
  • SC also ruled that Aadhaar is not compulsory for admissions to schools as it is neither a service nor subsidy.
  • Further, since a child between the age of 6 to 14 years has the fundamental right to education under Article 21A of the Constitution, school admission cannot be treated as ‘benefit’.

Aadhar linking to PAN and for Income Tax-returns filing

  • SC upheld the Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act, which mandates linking of Aadhaar to PAN and providing Aadhaar while filing income-tax returns.
  • By this ruling linking of PAN with Aadhar will also be mandatory. 

Aadhar linking to banks and mobile phones

  • The circular of the Department of Telecommunications, which mandated Aadhaar-based re-verification of mobile numbers, has been held illegal and unconstitutional.
  • The provision in the Aadhaar Act that allowed private entities to conduct authentications too has been held illegal, due to which corporate bodies including banks, telecom operators, mobile wallets, etc will not be able to press any customer for his or her Aadhaar number.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mandsaur Inscription of Kumaragupta

Mandsaur Inscription of Kumaragupta It was written by  Vatsabhatta   during the period of   Kumaragupta (5th century). The starting of the inscription praises the sun god and asks for his blessings. The Mandsaur inscription refers to Kumara Gupta 'reginging over the whole earth' ( kumaragupte prithvim prasasti ). It mentions about many silk weavers migrating from Lata (Gujarat) to Dasapura. Some took up other occupations, while those who kept to their original craft formed a guild. Tantuvaya   was the name given to the guild mentioned in Kumargupta's Mandsore inscription. During his reign, the guild of silk-weavers built a temple   dedicated to Surya in Dashapura  
Read more

Later Vedic Period

Sources of Information: Sam Veda, Yajur Veda and Atharva Veda . Other sources : Brahmanas - The Detailed commentaries/ explanations on the Vedas. Aranyakas (forest books)- Explains metaphysics & symbolism of sacrifice. Upanishads or books on philosophy or deeper knowledge about ‘aatma’, ‘brahma’ etc. They are antiritualistic. Geographical Expansion Aryans became generally familiar with the major portion of the Gangetic valley where they gradually settled. Western Ganga-Valley was called ‘ Aryavarta’ Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean , Several Himalayan peaks and Vindhya mountains (indirectly) are mentioned. Society Visible 4-fold varna system and appearance of several ‘ jaatis’ or castes made the social system complex . Untouchability appeared; women’s position degraded as they no longer got formal education. Gotra was the place where cattle resided together with ‘janas’ and later developed into an identity for the ‘janas’. Nishad , Ch...
Read more

Sadiya Serpent Pillar (Assam)

Sadiya Serpent pillar, is an ancient octagonal stone pillar that was erected in the region of historical Sadiya in Assam . The stone pillar contains one of the earliest Ahom inscription founded to date inscribed in it, dated to 1532. The inscription dates to the reign of Suhungmung Dihingia Raja (1497–1539 ). Ahoms who captured Sadiya in 1532 and entered into a treaty with the local Mishmi tribe , the terms of the treaty were inscribed on an eleven feet high stone pillar, constructed in a design of a huge serpent encircling it from bottom to top. The epigraph consisting 9 and a half lines on the pillar is a proclamation issued by Phrasenmung Borgohain (Ahom governor of Sadiya) asking the Mishimis to pay annual tribute in certain articles and to dwell on one side of the Dibang River.
Read more