The Yogi Adityanath government of Uttar Pradesh has refused to accept Aadhaar as a birth certificate. The planning department has written a letter to all the departments and warned them. The government has based its letter on UIDAI’s letter. On the other hand, in the ongoing debate on SIR in the Supreme Court, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, while supporting the state governments of Kerala and West Bengal, said that despite having Aadhaar, the names of voters are being removed. Aadhaar also became a party in the ongoing debate on SIR before Bihar elections.
In some part of the country, some or the other dispute regarding Aadhaar often comes to the fore. There is hardly any state in the country where there has not been an uproar on this issue. Despite the clear order of the Supreme Court, the attitude of all parties regarding Aadhaar is lax. As a result, this issue is still debated in the Supreme Court every day. To understand this entire matter, it is important to look at the utility of Aadhaar along with its legal, technical and social aspects. Aadhaar is now an identification system covering almost the entire population of the country, hence its impact also falls on every state and every class. For this reason, the controversy does not end but keeps coming up in different forms from time to time across the country.
Why doesn’t the controversy over Aadhaar stop? What are the rules and regulations regarding this? Know 5 big reasons and also where Aadhaar is being used? Let us understand in detail.
1- Questions present in every state, everywhere
Aadhaar has been implemented by the Central Government in the entire country. On different occasions, the Supreme Court made almost all the big states along with the Center a party in the Aadhaar case. That is, if seen practically, issues related to Aadhaar have arisen in some form or the other in almost all the states of the country. Somewhere in the form of problem in ration distribution, somewhere in the matter of stoppage of pension or MNREGA wages, and somewhere in the form of debate regarding linking with schools, colleges, banks and mobile SIMs. In this way, this dispute is not limited to one or two states but is a spread issue at the national level.
2- Supreme Court’s decision on legal background and basis
The biggest controversy over Aadhaar was its constitutional and legal status. And whether it violates the right to privacy of citizens or not? In 2018, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice K.S. In the Puttaswamy vs. Union of India case, the Aadhaar Act was largely held to be constitutional, but some provisions were rejected or limited. The court said that Aadhaar is a valid law for targeted delivery of subsidies and government benefits. The majority did not object to it being passed as a money bill, although Justice Chandrachud considered it unconstitutional.
Supreme Court
Mandatory Aadhaar linking with bank account and mobile SIM rejected. The mandatory demand for Aadhaar (Section 57) by private companies was also largely invalidated. This decision did not completely end the controversy, but did leave room for further debate by accepting a limited valid framework. Later, the court mostly rejected the review petitions, but Justice Chandrachud again disagreed.
3- Know the 5 big reasons for the dispute regarding Aadhaar
- Fear of privacy and surveillance
The basic structure of Aadhaar is based on biometric data, fingerprints, iris scan and photo. Critics say that if such sensitive data is collected in one place, it can become a tool of mass surveillance for the state or anyone else. The debate over the Puttaswamy judgment and the analyzes summarizing the judgment clearly reflect the concern that Aadhaar might become a step towards a surveillance state. The Supreme Court examined these apprehensions seriously, although the majority said that due to the existing security provisions, it would not be right to call it a surveillance state. Yet a large section of civil society and technical experts feel that without data protection laws, independent monitoring mechanisms and strong accountability mechanisms, this threat will persist.
- Data leaks and distrust regarding security
From time to time, claims of leakage of Aadhaar data or information related to Aadhaar have appeared in some reports including media. UIDAI often rejected these claims or stated that the damage was limited, but the common citizen was left with the impression that his data was not completely secure. The credibility of any digital identity system depends on people considering it secure. Whenever there is any news related to data security, controversy comes to the fore again.
- Cases of denial of benefits and technical glitches
Aadhaar was introduced in the name of stopping leakage of subsidies and schemes to the poor and marginalized people. But there were reports from many states that due to fingerprint not matching or network not working, people could not get ration, pension or wages. Ground reports show that the problem was more serious among the elderly, laborers and tribal areas. It was also accepted in the Supreme Court’s decision that in case of technical failure, an alternative system is necessary, so that no person is deprived of his rights merely because of failure of Aadhaar authentication.
- Difference between legal scope and actual practice
The court has made it clear that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory for opening a bank account, getting a mobile SIM, admission in school or many personal services. Aadhaar will be mainly used for government subsidies, benefits and services. Despite this, at many places schools, hospitals, housing societies, employment institutions or private companies ask for Aadhaar as a mandatory document. Even where the law prohibits it, the mentality of no Aadhaar, no service is visible in practice. This difference creates confusion among people. As a result, complaints of misuse or overuse of Aadhaar are common across the country.
- The clash of democratic debate and technological complexity
Aadhaar is a technology-driven project but its impact extends to democratic rights, privacy, social justice and federal structure. There was a big controversy even when it was passed as a money bill in the Parliament. Justice Chandrachud, in his dissenting opinion, called it against the basic structure of the Constitution, especially the role of the Rajya Sabha. The entire controversy raised questions about whether there was sufficient democratic debate, parliamentary scrutiny and public hearings on such a wide-reaching digital identity scheme. Those who believe that this process was incomplete, see Aadhaar as a project imposed from above, due to which disagreement remains.
Aadhar card
4- Where is Aadhaar used and what are the rules?
After the law and the decision of the Supreme Court, the broad structure of the use of Aadhaar is formed in this way. Government subsidies and benefits. Schemes like food subsidy, kerosene, fertilizers. MNREGA wages, widow pension, scholarship etc. In these cases, the government can use Aadhaar as a means of identification and authentication, provided alternatives are available and no one’s rights are lost in the event of a technical failure.
Link to Income Tax and PAN: The Supreme Court considered the amendment made in the Income Tax Act as valid, hence the PAN Aadhaar linking was maintained. The argument given was that this is necessary for tax compliance and to prevent fake identities.
Banking and Mobile Services: Initially, bank and SIM linking with Aadhaar was expanded very aggressively. In a 2018 decision, the majority bench of the Supreme Court held the mandatory Aadhaar linking for mobile SIM and bank account unconstitutional because it was neither proportionate nor based on sufficient legal basis, that is, it is no longer mandatory at the level of rules, although in practice it is still insisted upon in the name of KYC in many places.
Provisions related to education and children: The court said that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory for examinations like CBSE, UGC, NEET. Primary education has been considered a right, hence the court gave instructions to ban the requirement of Aadhaar here. Parental consent was considered necessary for children’s Aadhaar and the theoretical right to opt out of Aadhaar upon attaining adulthood was accepted.
Use in private sector: Under Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act, private companies were also given the scope to use Aadhaar. The Supreme Court read it broadly and reduced it and said that private institutions cannot legally make the demand for Aadhaar mandatory through mere contract. In future, if the Parliament wishes, it can increase the use of Aadhaar in certain sectors through a separate law, but even then it will have to meet the criteria of confidentiality and proportionality.
5- There is a dispute, but it cannot be decisive.
People have mixed views on this matter. On one hand, many people consider Aadhaar as a means of ease and convenience. Bank, subsidy, mobile, all the work is done with a single ID. On the other hand, rights advocacy groups, lawyers and technology experts emphasize its shortcomings and dangers.
For the common voter, it becomes a matter of everyday convenience versus abstract privacy and constitutional questions, in which the favor of convenience prevails. Issues like employment, inflation, caste equation, local development etc. often remain primary in elections. The debate on Aadhaar is more visible among the media, courts and experts; it is not as intense in the general election discussion.
There is a lack of alternative models
Most parties agree on goals like poverty-free targeted subsidies, stopping fake beneficiaries, leakages etc. Despite the order of the Supreme Court, a better, practical and widely accepted alternative model to Aadhaar has not yet emerged. Therefore, the opposition also mostly raises questions on the issues related to its implementation and confidentiality, and does not make the demand of scrapping the entire project from its roots the center of its agenda.
Also read: How does the rocket reach space, will Vikram-I become a game changer?