Aadhaar Stays, Minus Fangs And Pangs
SC Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Unique ID, Dissenting Judge Calls It A ‘Violation Of Fundamental Rights’
SC Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Unique ID, Dissenting Judge Calls It A ‘Violation Of Fundamental Rights’
You Don’t Have To Link Phone Or Bank A/c; Pvt Cos Can’t Demand No.
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:27.09.2018
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the validity of the Aadhaar Act, terming it a beneficial legislation, but weeded out provisions which had the potential for misuse. Aadhaar will no longer be mandatory for opening bank accounts, buying mobile phone SIM cards, getting school admissions, or for appearing in boards or common entrance examinations.
The SC also ruled that Aadhaar would be voluntary for those who do not intend to receive any subsidy, benefit or services under welfare schemes, and should only be given to Indian nationals. However, those filing income tax returns must link their Aadhaar with their PAN.
A five-judge constitution bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan upheld the NDA government’s Aadhaar legislation by a 4-1 majority, but said its insistence on linkage to bank accounts and mobile phones was disproportionate and every citizen could not be suspected of acquiring black money. Justice Chandrachud, in a strong dissenting judgment, described Aadhaar as unconstitutional.
“The portion of Section 57 of Aadhaar Act which enables corporate bodies and individuals to seek authentication is held to be unconstitutional,” the majority verdict said, agreeing with the petitioners that such a provision could lead to sharing of protected data and privacy of citizens with private bodies.
The court, while taking note of apprehensions expressed by opposition parties and other opponents of Aadhaar about its potential misuse, rebuffed their opposition to passage of the Aadhaar Bill as a money bill and said it was perfectly justified.
The opposition, which had the numbers in Rajya Sabha, could have stalled the bill in the upper House. However, the government got around the potential roadblock when the Lok Sabha Speaker upheld categorisation of the Aadhaar legislation as a money bill — a ruling which reduced Rajya Sabha’s role to rendering a mere advisory on corrections required in the bill.
Of the total 1,448-page judgment, Justice Sikri wrote the majority judgment for himself, CJI Misra and Justice Khanwilkar, running into 567 pages. Justice Bhushan penned a separate but almost concurrent 400-page opinion.
More ease of life, but less ease of business
The SC’s verdict could spell trouble for business models of finance firms . The ability to pull up an individual’s details in an instant had dramatically reduced the time and cost of acquiring customers. Not only private enterprises like Paytm’s e-wallet but government entities like SBI and India Post Payment Bank have built their digital accounts around Aadhaar. P18
Both BJP, Oppn claim victory
Both BJP and opposition hailed the SC’s Aadhaar verdict as a vindication of their stand. BJP chief Amit Shah said it was a strong validation of Aadhaar as an instrument of service delivery and mocked the Congress chief, saying, “Yes, the Congress won today, just like they won Lok Sabha polls in 2014.” Earlier, Rahul Gandhi thanked apex court “for supporting the Congress vision”. P 13
You can ask telcos to delete UID data
The SC’s verdict on Aadhaar empowers you to seek removal of your personal information from the records of telecom, banking, mutual funds and insurance firms which had earlier demanded biometric authentication. With the SC making it clear that Aadhaar linkage with firms is not must, customers who have parted with the information have the right to demand details be withdrawn or deleted. P 18
21cr PAN-Aadhaar linkages till now
More than 21.08 crore permanent account numbers (PANs) have been linked with Aadhaar till now, a latest data revealed as the SC upheld the validity of the linkage between the two databases on Wednesday. The total operational or issued PANs are more than 41.02 crore as per the same timeline, the data said. Of the 41.02 crore PANs issued, 40.01 crore PANs are held by individuals. P 13
Need legislative mechanism for protection of data, says SC
Delivering a powerful 481-page dissent judgment, Justice Chandrachud said categorization of an ordinary Aadhaar bill as money bill was wrong and its passage without voting in Rajya Sabha rendered it unconstitutional. Justice Chandrachud also raised serious issues about Aadhaar having the potential to turn India into a surveillance state.
The scathing observations, however, paled before the pat the NDA government got, with the majority judgment endorsing the idea of Aadhaar as advantageous to the underprivileged millions. “We have come to the conclusion that Aadhaar Act is a beneficial legislation which is aimed at empowering millions of people in the country,” the court said. However, it added, “We are of the view that there is a need for a proper legislative mechanism for data protection.”
It also turned down the contention of the petitioners, 31 in all, that Aadhaar was a means to convert India into a surveillance state. “The architecture of Aadhaar as well as the provisions of the Aadhaar Act do not tend to create a surveillance state. This is ensured by the manner in which the Aadhaar project operates,” Justice Sikri said and detailed Aadhaar’s embedded security and safety measures narrated by UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey.
It also did not find evidence to suggest, as argued by petitioners, that Aadhaar was meant to create 360 degree profiles of individuals. “We are of the view that it is very difficult to create profile of a person simply on the basis of biometric and demographic information. Insofar as authentication is concerned, the Centre and the UIDAI rightly pointed out that there are sufficient safeguard mechanisms,” the SC said.
However, the bench struck down Regulation 27(1) of Aadhaar which provided that authentication records were to be stored for five years. Drastically reducing this, the SC said storing Aadhaar authentication records for six months would serve the purpose.
The SC also struck down Section 33(1) of Aadhaar which permitted a joint secretary level officer to permit release of biometric and demographic data of a person from UIDAI for the purpose of national security.
However, it clarified that non-possession of Aadhaar could not be a ground to deny benefits to the needy under a social welfare scheme provided s/he furnished other identification documents.
For full report, www.toi.in
FULL COVERAGE: P 12, 13, 18
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:27.09.2018
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the validity of the Aadhaar Act, terming it a beneficial legislation, but weeded out provisions which had the potential for misuse. Aadhaar will no longer be mandatory for opening bank accounts, buying mobile phone SIM cards, getting school admissions, or for appearing in boards or common entrance examinations.
The SC also ruled that Aadhaar would be voluntary for those who do not intend to receive any subsidy, benefit or services under welfare schemes, and should only be given to Indian nationals. However, those filing income tax returns must link their Aadhaar with their PAN.
A five-judge constitution bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan upheld the NDA government’s Aadhaar legislation by a 4-1 majority, but said its insistence on linkage to bank accounts and mobile phones was disproportionate and every citizen could not be suspected of acquiring black money. Justice Chandrachud, in a strong dissenting judgment, described Aadhaar as unconstitutional.
“The portion of Section 57 of Aadhaar Act which enables corporate bodies and individuals to seek authentication is held to be unconstitutional,” the majority verdict said, agreeing with the petitioners that such a provision could lead to sharing of protected data and privacy of citizens with private bodies.
The court, while taking note of apprehensions expressed by opposition parties and other opponents of Aadhaar about its potential misuse, rebuffed their opposition to passage of the Aadhaar Bill as a money bill and said it was perfectly justified.
The opposition, which had the numbers in Rajya Sabha, could have stalled the bill in the upper House. However, the government got around the potential roadblock when the Lok Sabha Speaker upheld categorisation of the Aadhaar legislation as a money bill — a ruling which reduced Rajya Sabha’s role to rendering a mere advisory on corrections required in the bill.
Of the total 1,448-page judgment, Justice Sikri wrote the majority judgment for himself, CJI Misra and Justice Khanwilkar, running into 567 pages. Justice Bhushan penned a separate but almost concurrent 400-page opinion.
More ease of life, but less ease of business
The SC’s verdict could spell trouble for business models of finance firms . The ability to pull up an individual’s details in an instant had dramatically reduced the time and cost of acquiring customers. Not only private enterprises like Paytm’s e-wallet but government entities like SBI and India Post Payment Bank have built their digital accounts around Aadhaar. P18
Both BJP, Oppn claim victory
Both BJP and opposition hailed the SC’s Aadhaar verdict as a vindication of their stand. BJP chief Amit Shah said it was a strong validation of Aadhaar as an instrument of service delivery and mocked the Congress chief, saying, “Yes, the Congress won today, just like they won Lok Sabha polls in 2014.” Earlier, Rahul Gandhi thanked apex court “for supporting the Congress vision”. P 13
You can ask telcos to delete UID data
The SC’s verdict on Aadhaar empowers you to seek removal of your personal information from the records of telecom, banking, mutual funds and insurance firms which had earlier demanded biometric authentication. With the SC making it clear that Aadhaar linkage with firms is not must, customers who have parted with the information have the right to demand details be withdrawn or deleted. P 18
21cr PAN-Aadhaar linkages till now
More than 21.08 crore permanent account numbers (PANs) have been linked with Aadhaar till now, a latest data revealed as the SC upheld the validity of the linkage between the two databases on Wednesday. The total operational or issued PANs are more than 41.02 crore as per the same timeline, the data said. Of the 41.02 crore PANs issued, 40.01 crore PANs are held by individuals. P 13
Need legislative mechanism for protection of data, says SC
Delivering a powerful 481-page dissent judgment, Justice Chandrachud said categorization of an ordinary Aadhaar bill as money bill was wrong and its passage without voting in Rajya Sabha rendered it unconstitutional. Justice Chandrachud also raised serious issues about Aadhaar having the potential to turn India into a surveillance state.
The scathing observations, however, paled before the pat the NDA government got, with the majority judgment endorsing the idea of Aadhaar as advantageous to the underprivileged millions. “We have come to the conclusion that Aadhaar Act is a beneficial legislation which is aimed at empowering millions of people in the country,” the court said. However, it added, “We are of the view that there is a need for a proper legislative mechanism for data protection.”
It also turned down the contention of the petitioners, 31 in all, that Aadhaar was a means to convert India into a surveillance state. “The architecture of Aadhaar as well as the provisions of the Aadhaar Act do not tend to create a surveillance state. This is ensured by the manner in which the Aadhaar project operates,” Justice Sikri said and detailed Aadhaar’s embedded security and safety measures narrated by UIDAI CEO Ajay Bhushan Pandey.
It also did not find evidence to suggest, as argued by petitioners, that Aadhaar was meant to create 360 degree profiles of individuals. “We are of the view that it is very difficult to create profile of a person simply on the basis of biometric and demographic information. Insofar as authentication is concerned, the Centre and the UIDAI rightly pointed out that there are sufficient safeguard mechanisms,” the SC said.
However, the bench struck down Regulation 27(1) of Aadhaar which provided that authentication records were to be stored for five years. Drastically reducing this, the SC said storing Aadhaar authentication records for six months would serve the purpose.
The SC also struck down Section 33(1) of Aadhaar which permitted a joint secretary level officer to permit release of biometric and demographic data of a person from UIDAI for the purpose of national security.
However, it clarified that non-possession of Aadhaar could not be a ground to deny benefits to the needy under a social welfare scheme provided s/he furnished other identification documents.
For full report, www.toi.in
FULL COVERAGE: P 12, 13, 18
