Minority
verdict echoes the statement of concern issued by 17 eminent citizens and the recommendations
of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance
26 Sept. 2018, New Delhi: Verdict of Supreme Court of 4 Judges of the 5-Judge Constitution Bench on biometric data based 12 digit Unique Identification (UID) number branded as Aadhaar is manifestly unscientific and anti-poor. The verdict was delivered today. It has taken citizens to pre-Magna Carta days (1215 AD) or even earlier, to the days prior to the declaration of Cyrus, the Persian King (539 BC) that willed freedom for slaves.
The Court failed to rigorously examine the ramifications of
biometric information based identification of residents of India in the light
of global experiences. UK, China, Australia, US and France have scrapped
similar initiatives. US Supreme Court, Philippines’ Supreme Court and European
Court of Human Rights have ruled against the indiscriminate biometric profiling
of citizens without warrant.
UID/Aadhaar is akin to to Sanjay Gandhi's forced family planning
programs. Even Sanjay Gandhi faced the adverse consequences of forcing planning
on human body. Aadhaar-linked programs make Indian citizens subjects of Big
Data companies.
The opening statement of the verdict
authored by by Justices A.K.Sikri and concurred by, Dipak Mishra, and A.M.
Khanwilkar reads: “It is better to be unique than the best. Because, being the
best makes you the number one, but being unique makes you the only one.
2) Unique makes you the only one’ is the central message of Aadhaar, which is
on the altar facing constitutional challenge in these petitions.”
Before going through the 1448 page long verdict, Citizens Forum
for Civil Liberties (CFCL) submits as a initial reaction that this opening
statement in the order is questionable from scientific point of view. A report “Biometric Recognition: Challenges
and Opportunities” of the National Research Council, USA published on 24
September 2010 concluded that the current state of biometrics is ‘inherently
fallible’. That is also one of the findings of a five-year study. This study
was jointly commissioned by the CIA, the US Department of Homeland Security and
the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Another study titled “Experimental Evidence of a Template Aging
Effect in Iris Biometrics” supported by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA),
the Biometrics Task Force and the Technical Support Working Group through Army
contract has demolished the widely accepted fact that iris biometric systems
are not subject to a template aging effect. The study provides evidence of a
template aging effect. A “template aging effect” is defined as an increase in
the false reject rate with increased elapsed time between the enrollment image
and the verification image. The study infers, “We find that a template aging
effect does exist. We also consider controlling for factors such as difference
in pupil dilation between compared images and the presence of contact lenses,
and how these affect template aging, and we use two different algorithms to
test our data.”
A report “Biometrics: The Difference Engine: Dubious security”
published by The Economist in its 1 October 2010 issue observed “Biometric
identification can even invite violence. A motorist in Germany had a finger
chopped off by thieves seeking to steal his exotic car, which used a
fingerprint reader instead of a conventional door lock.” Notwithstanding
similar unforeseen consequences Prime Minister’s faith in biometric remains
unshaken. It seems that considerations other than truth have given birth to
this faith. Is there a biological material in the human body that constitutes
biometric data which is immortal, ageless and permanent? Besides working
conditions, humidity, temperature and lighting conditions also impact the
quality of biological material used for generating biometric data. UID/Aadhaar is
based on the unscientific and questionable assumption that there are parts of
human body likes fingerprint, iris, voice etc” that does not age, wither and
decay with the passage of time.
Stalwarts like Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, a people’s judge of
the Supreme Court, S R Sankaran, a people's bureaucrat and K. G. Kannibaran,
author of The Wages of Impunity had opposed biometric UID/Aadhaar and Unique
Identification Authority of India (UIDAI). Their views were endorsed by the
Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance. The dissenting order of Justice
Chandrachud echoes their views. The Bhartiya Janata Party led Government like the
previous Congress Party led Government has been bulldozing the Unique
Identification (UID) /Aadhaar number database project down the throat of
citizens.
Before their
death Justice Iyer, Kannabiran and Sankaran issued a Statement of
Concern against the biometric UID/aadhaar number in September 2010
along with fourteen other eminent citizens. The Statement of Concern reads:
“The project that proposes to give every resident a `unique identity number’ is
a matter of great concern for those working on issues of food security, NREGA,
migration, technology, decentralisation, constitutionalism, civil liberties and
human rights....This project is intended to collect demographic data about all
residents in the country." It further reads: "The involvement of
firms such as Ernst & Young and Accenture raise further questions about who
will have access to the data, and what that means to the people of India."
The statement also observed the following: "Constitutionality
of this project, including in the matter of privacy, the relationship between
the state and the people, security and other fundamental rights."
In the light
of the tragic cases of civil death and actual deaths caused by UID/Aadhaar
project since September 2010, there is a compelling logic for abandoning this
project like other civilized countries. This project treats citizens worse than
prisoners. It is aimed at enslaving present and future generations of Indians
including future PMs, CMs, Judges and soldiers by the beneficial owners of
ungovernable technology companies who have turned political parties into
puppets through their limitless anonymous donations.
In the face
of assault on citizens’ rights and the emergence of a regime that is making
legislatures and judiciary subservient to automatic identification, big data
mining and artificial intelligence companies, the majority verdict on
UID/Aadhaar project and Aadhaar Act has undermined the sovereignty of the country.
Majority verdict of the Supreme Court has missed the opportunity
to save Indians from the dictator ship of anonymous donors who have compromised
national security and almost all the public institutions.
If it is not reviewed soon India's social policies will be
guided by biometric and genetic determinism and eugenic thinking or not. It demonstrates
that right to have natural and human rights of citizens can be made conditional
by their servant, the government.
Citizens
Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL) used this Statement of Concern to launch its
campaign for freedom from UID/Aadhaar in 2010. Since it has been demanding stoppage
of biometric and demographic data collection for the UID/Aadhaar project. CFCL
is involved in the research and advocacy against surveillance technologies like
UID/Adhaar and DNA profiling. It had appeared before the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Finance that questioned and trashed the biometric
identification of Indians for UID/Aadhaar.
For Details:
Gopal Krishna, Convener, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL), Mb: 9818089660,
E-mail:krishnaruhani@gmail.com
Post a Comment