In my following blog, I
had summarized the arguments by the advocates of the petitioners and the
observations of the Supreme Court, in the current hearing on the validity of Aadhar
:
Since then
there has been some more arguments and observations , as follows ( Eco Times /
24 Jan ) . Some more will be heard today :
Adv
Shyam Divan ( for the petitioners ) :
·
The whole Aadhaar network was to be used for everything and
everybody.
·
In a democratic framework governed by the Constitution, a
citizen should have the option of protecting himself by refusing to share
crucial information about himself with anybody and everybody. "A citizen
should have the choice of providing alternative means of identification,"
he said, especially if spread of the information exposes him and makes him
vulnerable.
·
The silos of information, which includes biometrics being
collected under Aadhaar, may not per se be violative of a person's privacy, but
aggregated today would enable the state to profile every citizen's life, making
India a surveillance state. He said a citizen's right to privacy included the
right to lead a dignified life. This includes the right to keep one's intimate
affairs to oneself. In addition, he should enjoy the right to be left alone and
the right to retain his identity from cyber attacks. Seen in this
backdrop, the state can only take away his privacy by a law for a legitimate
state interest, which must pass the test of reasonableness.
·
He pointed out that
both in the pre-statute period and the days following the law, there was no
rigour to the Aadhaar enrolment process. The quality of data being collected
under self-certification was also questionable, he argued. The government could
also, if it chose, erase the Aadhaar data and denude any citizen of all his
civil rights under the Constitution, he argued. "The programme, in its
invasiveness, reach and the amount of control it will give the state, militates
against an open, liberal, democratic society.
·
It is the State’s responsibility to
protect citizens from both non-state and state actors
Adv
Kapil Sibal added :
Yes, we are in a networked world. We have to share information….. To what
extent should private entities be given personal data and to what extent do we
protect ourselves ?
================================
Observations
by Supreme Court :
·
Are such fears valid in a networked age when citizens have to
part with data at every stage to avail services ?
·
If the Aadhar scheme were to be declared legal can it be used
for all purposes or only for limited purposes ?
·
All of our data is anyway
with private entities. So, does the interpolation of Aadhar Number make any
difference ?
·
Could the concern and the danger of a personal data leak could be
avoided if there is a declaration that “ personal information collected would
only be used for the purpose for which they are collected “ ?
May be it is too early to say : Perseverance Pays
But I do get a feeling that the Hon Judges of the
Supreme Court found time to read my following emails ( sent on : supremecourt@nic.in ) :
AadharFact : Privacy Fiction ? [ 19 Jan
2018 ]
PRIVACY: A Lost Battle [ 15
Jan 2018 ]
https://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2018/01/privacy-lost-battle.html
AadharVirtual ID Compromised ? [ 12
Jan 2018 ]
https://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2018/01/aadhar-virtual-id-compromised.html
DataProtection without Data Privacy ? [
08 Jan 2018 ]
https://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2018/01/data-protection-without-data-privacy.html
My Take :
· Aadhar is Inescapable
· Modifications / Improvements must continue
· Privacy is an Illusion
No comments:
Post a Comment