Aadhar Project Of India Is Unconstitutional Says Praveen Dalal

Aadhar project of India or unique identification project of India (UID project of India) is a project that is a classic example of lack of management and planning. Aadhar project has been launched despite numerous shortcomings and deficiencies and as a futile project. Techno legal experts of India have been warning against the continuance of Aadhar project and have suggested that it should be scrapped.

The futility of Aadhar project and UIDAI was very apparent from the very beginning but Indian government and unique identification authority of India (UIDAI) kept on wasting crores of public money without any benefit. Finally, Aadhar project of India may be scrapped.

According to experts like Praveen Dalal, managing partner of techno legal ICT law firm Perry4Law and a Supreme Court lawyer, there is no second opinion about the fact that Aadhar Project and UIDAI are “Unconstitutional” in the absence of a “Constitutionally Sound Law” in this regard. This is more so when there are no dedicated Privacy Laws in India and Data Protection Laws in India, opines Praveen Dalal.

Even after the National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010 (NIDAI Bill 2010) would have become an applicable law, both Aadhar and UIDAI would have remained “Unconstitutional”. This is so because the “Constitutional Safeguards” that are required to make Aadhar/UIDAI Constitutional were still missing from the proposed Bill.

In fact, a parliamentary committee has rejected the NIDAI Bill 2010, inflicting a severe blow to UIDAI chairman Nandan Nilekani and raising doubts about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's pet project. This decision of parliamentary committee seems to be an acceptance of suggestions of experts like Praveen Dalal.

The parliamentary committee has recommended that the government should review or reconsider the project by a bringing in a fresh Bill. The committee has said that the Bill and the project are not acceptable in the present form.

Privacy laws in India and privacy rights in India have always been ignored. We have no national privacy policy in India as well. Data protection laws in India are missing and so are data privacy laws in India. Privacy, data protection and India seem to be separable and unrelated concepts.

Indian government launched projects like Aadhar, National Intelligence Grid (Natgrid), Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS), National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC), Central Monitoring System (CMS), Centre for Communication Security Research and Monitoring (CCSRM), etc. None of them are governed by any Legal Framework and none of them are under parliamentary scrutiny. It must be appreciated that intelligence gathering is not above privacy rights in India.

In reality, Aadhar project and UIDAI are booty sharing mechanisms meant for few companies. Praveen Dalal has been constantly suggesting that Aadhar project must be supported by a Techno Legal Framework that must be supplemented by robust Cyber Security, Privacy Protection and Data Protection.

Indian government, Aadhar project and UIDAI are hiding truth from Indian citizens and are fooling them. However, sooner or later the truth was bound to be revealed. Besides experts in India now even the home ministry of India has been opposing the Aadhar project and UIDAI.

Aadhar project is the most evil project of India that aims at strengthening illegal and unconstitutional privacy violation and e-surveillance in India. Internet censorship in India has already increased multifold. Censorship of Internet in India is a hint towards the growing hunger for e-surveillance by Indian government.

The truth of Aadhar project and UIDAI is too frightening to elaborate. Aadhar project and UIDAI have evil intentions that are executed under the façade of welfare and social good. Both Indian government and UIDAI are fooling Indians by using the façade of benefits and welfare. Aadhar project and UIDAI are big troubles. Still the PMO is supporting the unconstitutional Aadhar project and UIDAI.

Aadhar project and UIDAI are big brother project. Nandan Nilekani is wrong regarding Aadhar project. It is high time that Aadhar project of India and UIDAI must be scrapped. There is no sense in wasting any more time and money on a project like Aadhar that has no legal and constitutional basis to continue.

Can Raghu Raman Deliver Natgrid Project On Time?

Intelligence infrastructure of India is in big mess. Whether it is legal framework or technological infrastructure, Indian intelligence agencies have none. However, even if there are no laws to justify the working of intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies in India yet their works and projects are well beyond the justifications provided under the constitution of India.

In short, intelligence agencies of India and projects related to them are working without constitutional sanction and parliamentary oversight. Even worst is the fact that they are openly violating privacy rights and civil liberties of Indians.

Take the example of Aadhar project of India or UID project of India. It is managed by Nandan Nilekani as the chairman of unique identification authority of India (UIDAI). Aadhar project is hiding truth from Indians and is a very dangerous and e-surveillances oriented project.

Another project is national intelligence grid (Natgrid) that is also not supported by any legal framework and is well beyond parliamentary scrutiny. Projects like Aadhar, NATGRID, Central Monitoring System (CMS), etc are not desirable without “Constitutionally Sounds Laws” supporting them, opines Praveen Dalal, managing partner of Perry4Law and leading techno legal expert of India. Till now none of these projects are governed by any Legal Framework and Parliamentary Scrutiny informs Dalal.

Now Raghu Raman, project coordinator of Natgrid, has barely got an extension of six months. However, it is doubtful that he can deliver results in such a short period of time. Further, there is an urgent need to establish e-surveillance policy of India as soon as possible.

Lacks of Privacy Safeguards have already stalled Natgrid Project. Irrespective what Indian Government claims, Natgrid Project of India is in troubled waters. Natgrid would remain in doldrums till it is properly planned and legally implemented, opines Dalal.

Telemarketing Policy Of India Is Anti Consumers

Ministry of communication and information technology (MCIT) and telecom regulatory authority of India (TRAI) have not been taking privacy rights of consumers seriously at all. In fact, telecom policy of India is anti consumer in nature.

Both MCIT/TRAI need to make the telecom policy of India more pro active and telecom users’ friendly. However, till now this seems to be just a dream incapable of being fulfilled. Except, mobile number portability (MNP), there is no second policy decision that is user friendly and respects telecom consumer’s rights in India.

However, of all the bad policy decisions of MCIT/TRAI the worst one pertains to telemarketing. Firstly, MCIT/TRAI forced the do not call registry upon Indian telecom consumers. The proper course should have been a default do call registry.

Then MCIT/TRAI did not bother to introduce any deterrent to block telemarketing calls in India. The procedure has been deliberately made too complicated and unproductive that it does not benefit telecom consumers at all.

Further, even if a fine has been imposed, the troubled consumer would not get the same. Where is the incentive to take all the pain to get the guilty telemarketer held responsible? The telemarketing guidelines are inherently and apparently faulty and are violating privacy rights of Indians without any fear or deterrent.

Now the latest to add to this list is the proposal that telemarketers would get new landline number series. This would help customers recognise unsolicited calls, in line with the separate series for mobile telemarketers. MCIT has already issued a number series starting from '140' for calls and SMSes made from mobile services of registered telemarketers.

However, how this exercise would help in preventing violation of privacy rights of telecom consumers in India is still not clear. If a consumer is taking rest or is busy in a meeting or is of bad health, the mere fact of receiving a call from telemarketing companies is a big nuisance.

Strangely enough, neither MCIT nor TRAI have common sense of blocking all telemarketing calls and communications altogether and allow the same only in cases where the consumers have expressly asked to do so in their selective cases only.

However, MCIT and TRAI would never do to as the telemarketing lobby is strong enough to get a decision in their favour. And all other measures are just eyewash to show that MCIT and TRAI care for telecom consumers in India. The truth is that neither MCIT nor TRAI are in favour of protecting consumer rights and privacy rights in India. May be the Supreme Court of India would do something in this regard.

Aadhar Project And UIDAI Are Unconstitutional

Under the maze of media propaganda and false promises lies the naked truth regarding unique identification project of India (UID project of India) or Aadhar project of India. The truth is far more bitter and dangerous than as has been appreciated by few civil liberty activists of India.

The truth is that Aadhar project of India is not a social inclusion project but a social oppression instrumentality in the hands of Indian government. There is no second purpose of Aadhar project but to engage in illegal and unconstitutional e-surveillance in India.

According to Praveen Dalal, a Supreme Court Lawyer and leading techno legal expert of India, India does not have a “Constitutionally Sound” phone tapping and lawful interception law. Even projects like National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), CCTNS, Aadhar, etc are without any Legal Framework, informs Praveen Dalal. So much so that even after the passing of the National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010 (NIDAI Bill 2010), both Aadhar project and UIDAI are “Unconstitutional”, opines Praveen Dalal.

India must maintain a balance between civil liberties like privacy rights on the on hand and national security and e-surveillance requirements on the other. Giving exclusive primacy of one over other is not desirable.

The privacy matter is pending before the Supreme Court of India and it would be a good idea if the court formulates suitable and effective guidelines subject to which alone the Indian government and its instrumentalities can exercise lawful interception and e-surveillance powers. However, nothing can substitute a well though and much discussed lawful interception law in India by Parliament of India.