UID ULLOO

UID is Against Basic Human Values

Apropos the piece "A unique liberal dilemma"(Indian Express, 24 September), after the last UK elections, its clear that the campaign for citizens' sovereignty in India directed against the UID project (Aadhar or Niraadhar) is most representative of the majority of Indians across all classes and all democracies. In a December 2008 paper of Population Council, New Delhi, it is estimated that 258 million adults in India are migrants, of which the majority are men migrating for employment. While there is an existing Inter-state Migrant Workmen Act,1979 and there is a Supreme Court judgement delivered in July, 1990 in a writ petition involving migrant workers to the effect that "every State/Union Territory in India shall be obliged to permit officers of the originating State of the migrant labour for holding proper inquiries within the limits of the recipient States for enforcement of the Act and no recipient State shall place any embargo or hindrance in such process", the same has not been implemented. Has any newspaper raised this issue? How does UID play any role in this?

Citing migrant workers to justify UID appears to be an exercise in sophistry. The National Commission on Rural Labour, which submitted its report in 1991, studied the problem of inter-State migrant workmen in depth. This commission recommended third parties to file complaints to protect workers, ensure the liability of contractors and principal employers, setting up of Special Courts and changing the migration policy to reduce exploitation. Has any financial newspaper in particular deputed its reporters and editors to pursue it?. 

The most vulnerable and exploited migrant workers of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Orissa who work in Alang, Bhavnagar, Gujarat in a Guatanamo bay like condition akin to slaves with no rights. Their rights needs to be protected my genuine measures and not by fake initiatives like UID scheme. When The Financial Express took an editorial position to market Nandan Nilekani's Image of India and his conception of identity of Indian citizens, the Managing Editor looked like a writer of a paid feature (advertorial). It does not engage with the issues raised by the majority of Indians who are as skeptical of UID as most political parties are of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM)which has been declared unconstitutional in Germany, scrapped in Ireland and many other countries. Notably, "Security Analysis of India's Electronic Voting Machines", a research paper to be presented in October, 2010 at the ACM Computer and Communications Security conference led to the arrest of Hari Prasad, the co-author of the paper although some 16 political parties representing almost half of the Indian parliament have expressed serious concerns about the use of electronic voting amidst intriguing silence by those who support UID project. It appears that somehow the mindset that promotes unquestioned use of EVM with a touching faith in likes of Nilekani is the same mindset that promotesUID project with astounding concerns for those Below Poverty Line and the migrant workers. 

You quote Isaiah Berlin, a British philosopher and his concept of liberty implicitly underlining that UID does entail the issue of civil liberties. Did this newspaper ever take a position for migrant workers who face apartheid by local state governments and callousness from central government? The editor of this financial paper has failed examine why UK has abandoned a similar UID project because of massive and unprecedented people's opposition. Had Isaiah Berlin been alive (he died in 1997)he would have supported his fellow British citizens in rejecting the party and the government that "oversold the advantages of identity cards" like Nilekani and his acolytes are doing. In UK, during the 2010 General Election campaign, the published manifestos of the various parties revealed that the Labour Party planned to continue the introduction of the identity card scheme, while all other parties pledged to discontinue plans to issue ID cards. The Conservative party also explicitly pledged to scrap the National Identity Register. 

In the Conservative Party – Liberal Democrat Party Coalition Agreement that followed the 2010 General Election, the new UK government announced that they planned to scrap the ID card scheme, including the National Identity Register (akin to our National Population Register) as part of their measures 'to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties under the Labour Government and roll back state intrusion.' 

In May 2010, the new UK government announced that the scrapping of the identity card scheme which would save approximately £86 million over the following 4 years, and avoid a further £800 million in maintenance costs over the decade which were to have been recovered through fees. Indian government will also save millions like UK did by scrapping Nilekani's idea and accepting the opinion of majority of Indians who reject Nilekani's allergy with citizens being sovereigns because it comes in the way of a toxic notion of industrial development. Isaiah Berlin had rightly said, "All forms of tampering with human beings, getting at them, shaping them against their will to your own pattern, all thought control and conditioning is, therefore, a denial of that in men which makes them men and their values ultimate." UID project denies those non-negotiable values and is being marketed like a commercial commodity.        

List of signatories of a statement on the UID
Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Retired Judge, Supreme Court of India
Prof Romila Thapar, Historian
K.G.Kannabiran, Senior Civil Liberties Lawyer
Kavita Srivastava, PUCL and Right to Food Campaign
Aruna Roy, MKKS, Rajasthan
Nikhil Dey, MKKS, Rajasthan
S.R.Sankaran, Retired Secretary, Government of India
Deep Joshi, Independent Consultant
Upendra Baxi, Jurist and ex-Vice Chancellor of Universities of Surat and
Delhi
Uma Chakravarthi, Historian
Shohini Ghosh, Teacher and Film Maker
Amar Kanwar, Film Maker
Bezwada Wilson, Safai Karamchari Andolan
Trilochan Sastry, IIMB, and Association for Democratic Reforms
Prof. Jagdish Chhokar, ex- IIMA, and Association for Democratic Rights
Shabnam Hashmi, ANHAD
Justice A.P.Shah, Retired Chief Justice of High Court of Delhi

Citizens Declaration Against UID Number

New Delhi, July 9, 2011:  At a State level Consultation of Stakeholders Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) and Field sharings today at Gandhi Peace Foundation on concerns and issues on UIDAI, Citizens Declration Against UID/Aadhaar Number was adopted. The English and Hindi version of the Declaration is attached along with the Statement of Concern and the agenda of the meeting. There were discussions on assault on Individual liberty, violation of privacy and civil liberties and the basic flaws in the structure of UIDAI. The consulation was organised by Sahari Adhikar Manch and Indo Global Social Services Society.

The "Citizens Declaration Against UID Number" is given under: 


Citizens Declaration Against UID Number 

New Delhi, 9th July 2011


Taking cognisance of the Statement of Concern on Unique Identity (UID) Number/ Aadhaar Number project and its inter-linkages with the proposed legislations and institutional machinery issued by 17 eminent citizens led by Justice V R Krishna Iyer, we reject this project;

We demand immediate audit of the activities of the UID Authority of India since its inception till date;

We recommend to all the state governments, government departments and the few NGOs that are already collaborating with the government, to boycott this project with immediate effect;

We understand this project to be against national interest, human rights and natural resources. Therefore, we demand its abandonment;

We apprise the fellow citizens and residents that the project does not have any constitutional, legal or democratic basis. Therefore, we appeal to you to boycott it.

Let me respond to your considered reply based on careful perusal of documents. I can share all the documents for your consideration. I will be happy to read those papers which form the basis of your inference. In the Draft Land Titling Bill too there is a reference to Unique Property Identification Number. 

UID Number is linked to Islamabad based National Database & Registration Authority (NADRA) that was established in March 2000 to provide integrated homeland security solutions in Pakistan. Earlier, it was established as National Database Organization (NDO), an attached department under the Ministry of Interior, Government of Pakistan in 1998. 

On 10 March, 2000, NDO & Directorate General of Registration (DGR) merged to form NADRA, an independent corporate body with requisite autonomy to operate independently and facilitate good governance. With the mandate of developing a system for re-registering 150 million citizens, NADRA launched the Multi-Biometric National Identity Card project developed in conformance with international security documentation issuance practices in the year 2000. The program replaced the paper based Personal Identity System of Pakistan that had been in use since 1971.This year is also quite important.  

To date over 96 Million citizens in Pakistan and abroad have utilized the system and its allied services to receive tamper resistant ISO standard Identification Documents. NADRA has developed solutions based on Biometrics and RFID technology and has the largest IT infrastructure in Pakistan with highly qualified technical and managerial resources enabling NADRA to provide customized solutions to any country. 

Is there any development indicator that suggests that citizens or residents in Pakistan have benefited from  UID version (Multi-Biometric National Identity Card project) there?

Senior officials of NADRA and UIDAI like Tariq Malik and Nandan Manohar Nilekani have been awarded by ID WORLD International Congress, the Global Summit on Automatic Identification in Milan, Italy which is sponsored by agencies like American Bank Notes Corporation and French biometric technology company   .

While UIDAI has been informing the residents, citizens, concerned government departments and the media that the UID Number scheme is voluntary, the ‘Legal Framework For Mandatory Electronic Delivery of Services’ of Union Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, refers to “UIDAI – UID based authentication for services” as an enabler, thus making it compulsory. Although the National Identification Authority of India Bill (NIAI), 2010 has not yet been passed by the Parliament, UIDAI has been functioning without legislative approval since January 2009. 

You say, "Anti social elements, naxalites, maoists, terrorists like Mumbai blast  who are underground  or on ground but doing anti national work"

My response:  “Strategic Vision on the UIDAI Project” was prepared and submitted to Processes Committee of the Planning Commission (set up in July 2006) by M/S Wipro Ltd (Consultant for the design phase and program management phase of the Pilot UIDAI project). This Vision document is missing. Another 15 page document of WIPRO’s titled “Does India need a Unique Identity Number?” cited example of UK’s Identity Cards Act, 2006 on page 6 to advance the argument of UID Number in India.NOW UK’s new Government has abandoned its National Identity Cards Scheme and has announced it in the British Parliament, the same legislature which passed India Independence Act, 1947. Is UK government and UK Parliament full of "Anti social elements, naxalites, maoists, terrorists"?    

You say, fear of being identified by UID need not apply for UID , as its danger to them and the organisations that they work.

My response: In recent times, are you aware that the idea of Unique Identification (UID) Number originated in 1975, the controversial year to converge existing institutions. A “Homeland Security in India” underlines the connection between UID number and National Intelligence Grid (NAGRID). This document has been prepared by the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) which has a membership of over 300,000 companies and KPMG, a transnational firm that operates in 140 countries which is affiliated to KPMG International, a Swiss agency. NATGRID Chief Capt. Raghu Raman, wishes to hand over "internal security" of the country to the "commercial czars" and recommends "private territorial armies" to safeguard "corporate empires". 

Our Intelligence organisations are not accountable to the Parliament revealing this Intelligence Services (Powers and Regulation) Bill, 2011 has been introduced as a Private Member Bill by Manish Tiwari, Spokeserson of the Indian National Congress. Is it sufficient? 

Will UID database (CIDR) and NATGRID be under legislative scrutiny? 

Who is afraid of scrutiny in a context where corporate contributions to political parties is all set to be raised to 7.5% from the existing 5% of the average net profits during the three immediately preceding financial years? Let us first identify the donors of political organisations. The UID Number is driven by these seemingly anonymous corporate donors.  

You say "Rest can happily register without fear as it will  help elements anti-nationals who do bomb blasts or  hide identity or live with multiple identity need not apply."

My response: I wish to draw your attention towards Nandan Manohar Nilekani's promotion of Hernando de Sotto's failed idea and book 'The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else' through his own book Imagining India arguing that national ID system would be a big step for land markets to facilitate right to property and undoing of abolition of right to property in 1978 in order to bring down poverty!. Who is hiding the real motive of the UID Number?

Let us take note of multiple identities of Nandan Manohar Nilekani, who is working in the rank of a Cabinet Minister without oath of constitution and secrecy. 

Cabinet Minister Nilekani's Boss, Montek Singh Ahluwalia and Dr Manmohan Singh provides following multiple identities to him:

1) He is head of Technology Advisory Group on Unqiue Projects (TAGUP) that proposes "private company with public purpose" and with "profit making as the motive but not profit maximising".

2) He is head of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) which is functioning without legislative approval either at the centre or in the states and has signed contracts with US companies like L1 Identities Solution that works with US Intelligence agencies.

3) He is head of Committee on Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) technology for use on National Highways that proposes Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). 

4) He is head of Inter-ministerial task force to streamline the subsidy distribution mechanism which recommends something which contrary to the provisions of the Draft Food Security Bill. 

5) He is head of Government of India's IT Task Force for Power Sector recommends "Grid" despite Tenth Plan document revealing that there is 35-55 % loss in transmission and distribution of power.

6) He is member of National Knowledge Commission
7) He is member of Review Committee of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission

8) He is member of National Advisory Group on e-Governance

9) He is member of Subcommittee of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) that dealt with issues related to insider trading

10) He is member of Reserve Bank of India's Advisory Group on corporate governance

He has many more identities as a shareholder and as a former head of a corporation. 

Aren't we aware that UID Number is a component of the World Bank’s partnership with six multinational companies and two governments that was announced by the World Bank in Washington. Do we really believe that World Bank works to promote our supreme national interest? 

It is also to draw your attention towards a Wikileaks cable that reveals how the US State department is interested in knowing about India’s Unique Identification program, a biometric database of the world’s largest democracy. The information sought by US authorities is available on Wikileaks website. It also appears that UNDP’s “Innovation Support for Social Protection: Institutionalizing Conditional Cash Transfers“ as part of financial surveillance plan is also linked to it. 

Please do take cognizance of these facts and suggest how to respond to the concerns that emerge from them. 

thanks