The following is the operative part of the Aadhaar Judgement
In view of above discussions, we arrive at following conclusions:
1) The requirement under Aadhaar Act to give one’s demographic and biometric information does not violate fundamental right of privacy.
Taking this logic to its logical conclusion the top court may soon decide that Aadhaar linking to DNA profiles doesn’t violate the right to privacy either
(2) The provisions of Aadhaar Act requiring demographic and biometric information from a resident for Aadhaar Number pass threefold test as laid down in Puttaswamy (supra) case, hence cannot be said to be unconstitutional.
The three fold test in Putaswamy
The first requirement that there must be a law in existence to justify an encroachment on privacy is an express requirement of Article 21. For, no person can be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. The existence of law is an essential requirement.
Second, the requirement of a need, in terms of a legitimate State aim, ensures that the nature and content of the law which imposes the restriction falls within the zone of reasonableness mandated by Article 14, which is a guarantee against arbitrary State action. The pursuit of a legitimate State aim ensures that the law does not suffer from manifest arbitrariness. Legitimacy, as a postulate, involves a value judgment.Judicial review does not reappreciate or second guess the value judgment of the legislature but is for deciding whether the aim which is sought to be pursued suffers from palpable or manifest arbitrariness.
The third requirement ensures that the means which are adopted by the legislature are proportional to the object and needs sought to be fulfilled by the law. Proportionality is an essential facet of the guarantee against arbitrary State action because it ensures that the nature and quality of the encroachment on the right is not disproportionate to the purpose of the law
(3) Collection of data, its storage and use does not violate fundamental Right of Privacy.
(4) Aadhaar Act does not create an architecture for pervasive surveillance.
Forget the Indian state Wikileaks says the CIA already has the whole data base
QUOTE WikiLeaks published reports on Thursday that claimed to “expose” that CIA is using tools devised by US-based technology provider Cross Match Technologies for cyber spying ……Cross Match Technologies also provides biometric solutions to the Unique Identification Authority of India, the statutory body for Aadhaar leading to claims of possible data leakag END QUOTE Times of India
(5) Aadhaar Act and Regulations provides protection and safety of the data received from individuals.
App-based flaws A French security researcher pointed the flaws in the Aadhaar app that is available on the Google Play Store OnePlus leaves a backdoor in its devices in the form of ‘EngineerMode’ apk; allows root access with simple command
Government Website There have been multiple instances of Aadhaar data leaking online through government websites. The most recent case was when an RTI query pushed UIDAI to reveal that about 210 government websites made the Aadhaar details of people with Aadhaar, public on the internet.
Third party leaks There have been a number of leaks when it comes to demographic data. Sometimes the leak happens because of a picture is tweeted to showcase the infrastructure such as the time when Aadhaar card application of MS Dhoni leaked on the internet.
(6) Section 7 of the Aadhaar is constitutional. The provision does not deserve to be struck down on account of denial in some cases of right to claim on account of failure of authentication.
Section 7 The Central Government or, as the case may be, the State Government may, for the purpose of establishing identity of an individual as a condition for receipt of a subsidy,benefit or service for which the expenditure is incurred from, or the receipt therefrom forms part of, the Consolidated Fund of India, require that such individual undergo authentication,or furnish proof of possession of Aadhaar number or in the case of an individual to whomno Aadhaar number has been assigned, such individual makes an application for enrolment:
Provided that if an Aadhaar number is not assigned to an individual, the individualshall be offered alternate and viable means of identification for delivery of the subsidy,benefit or servic
(7) The State while enlivening right to food, right to shelter etc. envisaged under Article 21 cannot encroach upon the right of privacy of beneficiaries nor former can be given precedence over the latter.
Again mere words without any directions amounts to useless wishful thinking
(8) Provisions of Section 29 is constitutional and does not deserves to be struck down.
Section 29. No core biometric information, collected or created under this Act, shall be— shared with anyone for any reason whatsoever; or be used for any purpose other than generation of Aadhaar numbers and authentication under this Act.
2 The identity information, other than core biometric information, collected or created under this Act may be shared only in accordance with the provisions of this Act and in such manner as may be specified by regulations.
3 No identity information available with a requesting entity shall be— used for any purpose, other than that specified to the individual at the time of submitting any identity information for authentication; or disclosed further, except with the prior consent of the individual to whom such information relates.’
4 No Aadhaar number or core biometric information collected or created under this Act in respect of an Aadhaar number holder shall be published, displayed or posted publicly, except for the purposes as may be specified by regulations
(9) Section 33 cannot be said to be unconstitutional as it provides for the use of Aadhaar data base for police investigation nor it can be said to violate protection granted under Article 20(3).
(10) Section 47 of the Aadhaar Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional on the ground that it does not allow an individual who finds that there is a violation of Aadhaar Act to initiate any criminal process.
Sec 47 No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act, save on a complaint made by the Authority or any officer or person authorised by it.No court inferior to that of a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or a Chief Judicial Magistrate shall try any offence punishable under this Ac
(11) Section 57, to the extent, which permits use of Aadhaar by the State or any body corporate or person, in pursuant to any contract to this effect is unconstitutional and void. Thus, the last phrase in main provision of Section 57, i.e. “or any contract to this effect” is struck down.
Sec 57 Nothing contained in this Act shall prevent the use of Aadhaar number for establishing the identity of an individual for any purpose, whether by the State or any body corporate or person, pursuant to any law, for the time being in force, or any contract to this effect:
Provided that the use of Aadhaar number under this section shall be subject to the procedure and obligations under section 8 and Chapter V
(12) Section 59 has validated all actions taken by the Central Government under the notifications dated 28.01.2009 and 12.09.2009 and all actions shall be deemed to have been taken under the Aadhaar Act.
Anything done or any action taken by the Central Government under the Resolution of the Government of India, Planning Commission bearing notification number A-43011/02/2009-Admin. I, dated the 28th January, 2009, or by the Department of Electronics and Information Technology under the Cabinet Secretariat Notification bearing notification number S.O. 2492(E), dated the 12th September, 2015, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have been validly done or taken under this Act.
(13) Parental consent for providing biometric information under Regulation 3 & demographic information under Regulation 4 has to be read for enrollment of children between 5 to 18 years to uphold the constitutionality of Regulations 3 & 4 of Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update)Regulations, 2016.
Taking the fingerprints of children and justifying that with parental consent is incredibly immoral and a great way of creating little steeple who are already programmed to blindly follow the Government when they grow up
(14) Rule 9 as amended by PMLA (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 is not unconstitutional and does not violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 & 300A of the Constitution and Sections 3, 7 & 51 of the Aadhaar Act. Further Rule 9 as amended is not ultra vires to PMLA Act, 2002.
(15) Circular dated 23.03.2017 being unconstitutional is set aside.
The presence of the PMO and UIDAI reps in the meeting to practically force DOT to issue such a notification is disturbing and suggest a conspiracy to force mobile service providers to force users to link aadhaar to mobile connections
(16) Aadhaar Act has been rightly passed as Money Bill. The decision of Speaker certifying the Aadhaar Bill, 2016 as Money Bill is not immuned from Judicial Review.
(17) Section 139AA does not breach fundamental Right of Privacy as per Privacy Judgment in Puttaswamy case.
(18) The Aadhaar Act does not violate the interim orders passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 494 of 2012 and other Writ Petitions.
In result, this batch of cases is decided in following manner
All the Writ Petitions filed under Article 32 as well as Transfer Cases are disposed of as per our conclusions recorded above.
End of Judgement
What the Judges ought to have done is declare the any section of the Act COMPELLING Indian citizens to use the card as unconstitutional and void The Judgement should have centered on making the whole card OPTIONAL
It would admittedly create a new unfair caste system of the illiterate poor and their privacy invading card and the better off with their non bio metric privacy compliant cards
If any poor illiterate person wanted a non privacy invading smart card he should have been entitled to it
This judgement willy-nilly plays into the globalist hands
The sold out media sings praises of the judgement The middle class cares about their bank accounts mobile phones and school admissions
THATS BEEN TAKEN CARE OFF THE POOR IN THEIR RURAL BOONDOCKS ARE STUCK WITH AADHAAR
The judgement has rather cleverly upheld a patently unconstitutional law in the name of “protecting the interests of the poor” The truth is neither the rich nor the poor are protected by this globalist flimflam
The interest of the poor would have been much better served by an name, address and photograph SMART CARD like the Indian Army has done albeit on a much smaller scale
The ex-servicemen department of the ministry of defence (MoD ..has started issuing smart cards to the veterans, containing ..their medical history, medicines prescribed and other details for a quick reference At least 15,000 veterans and their family members in the city have so far received their smart card which will serve as a one-point access to avail ECHS benefit ..
Such a smart card is used in other countries and doesn’t require bio-metrics
The whole bio metric idea was pushed by globalists in the Manmohan Sigh Govt and then pushed even harder by globalists in the Modi camp
THESE GLOBALISTS ARE THE REAL ANTI NATIONALS DOING THE BIDDINGS OF THEIR TALMUDIC, THINK TANK AND FOUNDATION STRING PULLERS SEEKING TO USE THE MASSIVE INDIAN POPULATIONS AS LAB RATS FOR THEIR GLOBALIST GAMES
ANY GLOBALIST MOVE WHICH SUCCEEDS IN A HUGE COUNTRY LIKE INDIA CAN BE REPLICATED ANYWHERE