[sathya_g_m]

Post deleted by the Team-BHP Support : Please do NOT post messages that add little or no informational value to the thread. We need your co-operation to maintain the quality of this forum.

Please read our rules before proceeding any further. We request you to post ONLY when you have something substantial to add to a discussion.

[MAS]

Originally Posted by DieselFan

If RTO takes fingerprints instead of Aadhaar It would result in creation of another Nationwide​ database of fingerprints just like Aadhaar why would any government want to duplicate a expensive process. What is the harm in providing Aadhaar?

If this is the case, then why is the passport office taking fingerprints?

And what is the surety that a person cannot obtain multiple aadhar cards?

[sgiitk]

Originally Posted by MAS

If this is the case, then why is the passport office taking fingerprints?

And what is the surety that a person cannot obtain multiple aadhar cards?

Passport office takes fingerprints for biometrics. remember UIDAI will only confirm information, and not give out any. This is part of their charter.

As for multiple Aadhar cards they are trying had to stamp that out. Due to biometrics there are not that many around. But you have hit 99.99% percent but there is always to odd fellow who will get through.

[Axe77]

I have nothing against getting an Aadhar but its just that actually getting it has been proving a HUGE headache for me. I keep getting some sort of error or the other from their site. In a world where I already have a passport, electricity bill, drivers license all with my correct my home address listed, it becomes frustrating to have to get another ID which as a process is very user unfriendly.

[ksameer1234]

I don't think there is any reason to fret over the issue of infringing of privacy here. Linking with Aadhar will only lead to improved accuracy and faster service delivery. Government anyways has far more access to personal information about the citizens.

Since DL, RC and even mobile numbers are all linked to a person, this could pave way for a unified national system instead of the current state-wise RTOs who are bent upon acting like mafia protecting their turf.

Originally Posted by MAS

If this is the case, then why is the passport office taking fingerprints?

And what is the surety that a person cannot obtain multiple aadhar cards?

Originally Posted by deerhunter

Since Aadhar number is linked to biometrics, if you try to take a second one, the fingerprint and iris scan will automatically link you to the original number.

This should ensure that there is no duplicacy possible.

[binand]

Originally Posted by deerhunter

The latest SC ruling came after the bill was passed. The act came into force in March 2016 and the latest ruling came in september 2016. Link

This is only a judge staying a government directive. It is not a ruling in itself. The key aspects are captured in the final three paras of the linked article - that the bench accepted ABMSC's submission, stayed the use of Aadhar and asked the government to file its response. If the government replies and if the court finds it satisfactory, then the stay could be vacated.

Originally Posted by deerhunter

The money bill issue is a different case altogether.

The money bill issue, not to put too fine a point on it, appears to be a bug in our constitution that has the potential to make the Rajya Sabha completely irrelevant. I read through 4 pieces of legislation that set up various authorities (IRDA, NHAI, TRAI and UIDAI); the specific language that makes it a money bill is seen only in the UIDAI bill. Reading article 110 of the constitution it seems to me that as things stand, it is a completely legal loophole.

Originally Posted by deerhunter

Since Aadhar number is linked to biometrics, if you try to take a second one, the fingerprint and iris scan will automatically link you to the original number.

The thing is, Aadhar relies on third parties that enjoy a level of trust with the UIDAI. Therefore, if an enrolment center operator goes rogue, then it is possible to have multiple Aadhars for oneself - for example, what is stopping anyone from using the biometrics of a foreigner (who is not eligible for Aadhar, say) and fake ID papers to create a "spare" Aadhar?

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

I don't think there is any reason to fret over the issue of infringing of privacy here.

You probably know something that the rest of us don't. Here is Eben Moglen weighing in: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/colu...cle7781020.ece. Some IITD faculty members: http://www.cse.iitm.ac.in/~shwetaag/papers/aadhaar.pdf. DSCI: https://www.dsci.in/sites/default/fi...ai_project.pdf.

[ksameer1234]

Originally Posted by binand

You probably know something that the rest of us don't. Here is Eben Moglen weighing in: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/colu...cle7781020.ece. Some IITD faculty members: http://www.cse.iitm.ac.in/~shwetaag/papers/aadhaar.pdf. DSCI: https://www.dsci.in/sites/default/fi...ai_project.pdf.

At the risk of digressing from topic, from what I found quickly reading through the papers, they present risks associated with the data management and give recommendations to strengthen it. The news article liberally mixes up opinions with facts.

As for the privacy concerns, in my very limited and personal opinion, the risk to privacy is far greater from perceptibly trivial things like google maps, social media and that habit of Domino's to ask for mobile number before accepting orders than due to Aadhar number.

If anything, Pakistan has similar biometric database for more than a decade, which appears to be mandatory for obtaining various Government services and documents like here. I am sure UIDAI would have looked at how our neighbors are faring on this front before designing Aadhar project.

[deerhunter]

Originally Posted by binand

This is only a judge staying a government directive. It is not a ruling in itself....If the government replies and if the court finds it satisfactory, then the stay could be vacated.

I agree that it may not be a ruling in itself, but the judge was pretty clear when he reminded them of the earlier order that the Aadhar cannot be made mandatory till the SC gives a final verdict. Also the centre has publicly stated that it will not make the Aadhar mandatory till SC gives a final verdict. This assurance was given in the Lok Sabha, and if they renege on this promise, it will be a breach of privilege.

Regarding the stay being vacated if the government gives a satisfactory reply, what reply could possibly explain their act of breaching the 5 judge bench ruling as well as assurance given in the parliament?

Originally Posted by binand

The money bill issue, not to put too fine a point on it, appears to be a bug in our constitution that has the potential to make the Rajya Sabha completely irrelevant. Reading article 110 of the constitution it seems to me that as things stand, it is a completely legal loophole.

True that. When the founding fathers made the constitution, they envisaged the position of the speaker as an impartial referee (much like in the British parliament, from where the inspiration for our parliamentary system originates, where speaker once elected usually resigns his party membership). They never expected the speaker to act partisan. That is why the constitutional loophole.

I hope the SC overturns the speaker's decision of the bill being a money bill to uphold the spirit of the constitution. Even though the wording in the constitution gives the speaker the ultimate right to decide if a bill is a money bill, it also explains what constitutes a money bill. Earlier too SC has clarified various other such provisions, hope the same occurs here.

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

As for the privacy concerns, in my very limited and personal opinion, the risk to privacy is far greater from perceptibly trivial things like google maps, social media and that habit of Domino's to ask for mobile number before accepting orders than due to Aadhar number.

You cannot compare the two. Even though the whole internet itself is a privacy nightmare, the infringement of privacy rights by the state is far more dangerous. The state can do whatever it wants with the biometric data in the name of national security. The ruling party can easily implicate their opponents in various cases, using the biometrics. It may not occur now because the matter is in public spotlight, but once everything settles it can be a dangerous tool in the wrong hands.

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

If anything, Pakistan has similar biometric database for more than a decade, which appears to be mandatory for obtaining various Government services and documents like here. I am sure UIDAI would have looked at how our neighbors are faring on this front before designing Aadhar project.

There is no concept of civil rights in Pakistan. There are various European countries too with biometric collection, but the safeguards are stringent. There are no blanket provisions explained in vague terms like national security in those countries.

[ksameer1234]

Originally Posted by deerhunter

The ruling party can easily implicate their opponents in various cases, using the biometrics.

Apologies, but I am missing the sarcasm here.

The state can do whatever it wants with the biometric data in the name of national security.

Driving license issuance procedure anyways requires photo, fingerprint, address, contact number to be recorded in the database. I am sure it is / will be shared with relevant authorities in interest of national security. Government has its citizens' personal information and isn't really seeking anything new. So, why the fuss over Aadhar? Aadhar only aims to avoids same process over and over leading to efficiency and accuracy.

[wildsdi5530]

If Aadhar becomes mandatory, will having a mobile phone also become mandatory? What happens when you lose your phone?
Also what about your savings in bank accounts? Already banks credit various charges without notifying the account holder. Mobile networks reduce your balance for various 'services'. What if the GOVT just credits mandatory donations or election charges or some new cess from your account?
Not to be paranoid, but this is just like the Nazis branding Jews with numbers.
Does the PM and other politicians have Aadhar? At least 50% of the people I know don't have Aadhar card. But I have met several Bangaladeshi refugees with Aadhar card. Anyone can get an Aadhar card for ₹750/- as per the news last week.
They claim 90+% enrolment, but that's not what I see around me. This means either lot of fakes or lot of illegal Aadhar cards.

[deerhunter]

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

Apologies, but I am missing the sarcasm here.

I did not mean just the current ruling party. I meant any party ruling at the centre at any time in the future.

Originally Posted by ksameer1234

Driving license issuance procedure anyways requires photo, fingerprint, address, contact number to be recorded in the database. I am sure it is / will be shared with relevant authorities in interest of national security. Government has its citizens' personal information and isn't really seeking anything new. So, why the fuss over Aadhar? Aadhar only aims to avoids same process over and over leading to efficiency and accuracy.

Many states do not collect biometrics for issuing license.

Also, the government as of now cannot legally use the information collected for issuing driver's license. No court in the country will accept that. But the Aadhar act has a provision for using the same if the government wishes so. So by mandatorily linking Aadhar to driver's license, the government is forcing many unwilling citizens to take Aadhar and thus collect their biometrics, which can easily be used against them in the future if the govt wishes so. There are absolutely no safeguards.

[tilt]

Originally Posted by binand

*SNIPPED FOR RELEVANCE* what is stopping anyone from using the biometrics of a foreigner (who is not eligible for Aadhar, say) and fake ID papers to create a "spare" Aadhar?*SNIP*

I remember that Aadhar was originally meant only for Indian citizens, but I vaguely recall that it was later modified to include non-Indian citizens too.

Am I mistaken? Is there anything that authoritatively states that Aadhar is ONLY for Indian citizens; or even that Aadhar is not only for Indian citizens?

I am sure there are quite a few "foreigners" who are (or have been) long-term residents in India; including OCI-holders of Indian origin. What happens in those cases?

Of course, it would be easy to say "In that case do not consider yourselves eligible for L{G subsidies etc". However, these people too have to file tax returns in India, have to have an Indian driver's licence, do have to open bank accounts in India, do buy vehicles etc., do have to buy cell-phones etc.

If all these services make having an aadhar mandatory, non-citizens have to be permitted to enrol for aadhar.

The aadhar website gives no indication about the eligibility for aadhar.

Cheers

[tud]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Passport office takes fingerprints for biometrics. remember UIDAI will only confirm information, and not give out any. This is part of their charter.

Not anymore. Jio was an eye opener here. Signing up for Jio Mobile with Aadhaar did not send any confirmation request to UIDAI servers - instead, all information on Aadhaar card was downloaded to Jio servers. Jio did away with physical forms, so there is no confirmation request being sent, the bio metric is used as a tool for a direct download of all information.

WRT to DL, I would prefer Aadhaar integration - if there is one universal card that is required to be carried. When Aadhaar and DL are integrated, why is it mandated to carry two cards?

[deerhunter]

Originally Posted by tilt

I remember that Aadhar was originally meant only for Indian citizens, but I vaguely recall that it was later modified to include non-Indian citizens too.
Am I mistaken? Is there anything that authoritatively states that Aadhar is ONLY for Indian citizens; or even that Aadhar is not only for Indian citizens?
I am sure there are quite a few "foreigners" who are (or have been) long-term residents in India; including OCI-holders of Indian origin. What happens in those cases?

The enrolment criteria for Aadhar is residency. Aadhar act clearly mentions that it cannot be used as a proof of citizenship. So any resident alien can obtain an Aadhar.

Originally Posted by tud

Not anymore. Jio was an eye opener here. Signing up for Jio Mobile with Aadhaar did not send any confirmation request to UIDAI servers - instead, all information on Aadhaar card was downloaded to Jio servers.

Jio is one of the KUAs (eKYC User Agency) under UIDAI. They get full demographic (photo, name, address etc) information from UIDAI server, but not the biometric information. The biometric info (fingerprint in case of jio) is used to access the demographic info.

Full list of KUAs here (Link). They all can access demographic info if you give finger print.

[chncar]

Originally Posted by tud

WRT to DL, I would prefer Aadhaar integration - if there is one universal card that is required to be carried. When Aadhaar and DL are integrated, why is it mandated to carry two cards?

Spot on. Actually what would be preferably eventually is for a person to carry just one smart chip/rfid/nfc enabled 'national ID card' backed up by biometrics. The database can store what exactly his/her eligibility is for (e.g subsidy, whether they have a DL, if having a DL, which category etc) and the authorities like traffic police should be able to read it by tapping it on a smartphone (via NFC) etc. For transactions requiring PAN, it would also weed out any duplicate or fake PAN IDs and transactions. The same can be used for payment (with fingerprint authentication) once Aadhar pay (which is a game changer) is released. It could also be used for toll booth payment or public transport payment. It would make things a lot simpler for law abiding citizens.

For Europeans traveling within Europe, they don't need their traditional passport, just an ID card would be enough. As we are practically a small continent, having such a system will greatly help mobility and services within our country as well.

Another nice thing that could be enabled, once biometrics are properly captured and validated, is automation of the process of going through immigration. In Israel, for example, Israeli citizens can avoid having to stand in queue for an interview with an immigration official (unless otherwise flagged) and the whole thing is handled by an automated kiosk.
http://www.passengerselfservice.com/...ssport-kiosks/

As Aadhar is proof of identity and not citizenship, and it is a best-practice to capture biometric information of foreigners applying for visas anyway, it should be possible for Indian consulates abroad to also issue Aadhar cards to foreigners (separate category; clearly differentiated from those of Indian citizens of course) and let a visitor to India benefit from all the services hassle-free.

The possibilities are limitless.