Even Dhoni's UID details public, list privacy safeguards, says Supreme Court
, TNN|
Updated: Jan 19, 2018, 09.29 AM IST
NEW DELHI: The Centre will need to assure the Supreme Court that data collected under Aadhaar is fully protected and cannot be misused to ensure its ambitious scheme passes muster, with the apex court on Thursday asking what is the nature of the safeguard to prevent sale of information by private operators.
With a nine-judge bench last year declaring the right to privacy a fundamental right and asking the government to prepare a robust data protection regime, the apex court's Constitution bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan asked whether the government had taken measures to protect data related to Aadhaar.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the petitioners challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar scheme, told the bench that information collected by private operators was being sold and the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) had no control over them. Referring to news reports and sting operation of a news channel, he alleged private operators continued to hold demographic and biometric data which could be easily purchased and misused, violating the people's fundamental rights .
In its statements relating to leak of data, the UIDAI has repeatedly asserted that there has been no breach as far as biometric data are concerned and that Aadhaar authenticates identity but not the purpose of a transaction.
The bench, however, noted that Aadhaar details of former captain of Indian cricket team M S Dhoni was also made public. "What safeguard the government has introduced to ensure that information is not sold out and what is the nature of the safeguard?" Justice Chandrachud asked.
Divan claimed that the Aadhaar scheme had been unconstitutional from the beginning as the government could not compel citizens to part with personal information to private operators without sanction of law. He said 49,000 operators were blacklisted by the government till September 2017 and it showed something is wrong in the process. "I am questioning the very integrity and pervasive nature of the process. A person cannot travel or go to school or open a bank account or have an insurance policy or invest in mutual fund if he or she does not have Aadhaar," he said.
The bench, however, pointed out that people provide personal information to private companies while getting mobile connection and insurance and asked why they should be reluctant in giving information under Aadhaar scheme. "How can you say that it (information) is part of your identity while denying information to the government while you provide information to private parties. If you want mobile connection or insurance, you go to private entity and provide information to them," Justice Chandrachud said.
The arguments remained inconclusive and hearing would resume on January 23.
With a nine-judge bench last year declaring the right to privacy a fundamental right and asking the government to prepare a robust data protection regime, the apex court's Constitution bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan asked whether the government had taken measures to protect data related to Aadhaar.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the petitioners challenging the constitutional validity of Aadhaar scheme, told the bench that information collected by private operators was being sold and the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) had no control over them. Referring to news reports and sting operation of a news channel, he alleged private operators continued to hold demographic and biometric data which could be easily purchased and misused, violating the people's fundamental rights .
In its statements relating to leak of data, the UIDAI has repeatedly asserted that there has been no breach as far as biometric data are concerned and that Aadhaar authenticates identity but not the purpose of a transaction.
The bench, however, noted that Aadhaar details of former captain of Indian cricket team M S Dhoni was also made public. "What safeguard the government has introduced to ensure that information is not sold out and what is the nature of the safeguard?" Justice Chandrachud asked.
Divan claimed that the Aadhaar scheme had been unconstitutional from the beginning as the government could not compel citizens to part with personal information to private operators without sanction of law. He said 49,000 operators were blacklisted by the government till September 2017 and it showed something is wrong in the process. "I am questioning the very integrity and pervasive nature of the process. A person cannot travel or go to school or open a bank account or have an insurance policy or invest in mutual fund if he or she does not have Aadhaar," he said.
The bench, however, pointed out that people provide personal information to private companies while getting mobile connection and insurance and asked why they should be reluctant in giving information under Aadhaar scheme. "How can you say that it (information) is part of your identity while denying information to the government while you provide information to private parties. If you want mobile connection or insurance, you go to private entity and provide information to them," Justice Chandrachud said.
The arguments remained inconclusive and hearing would resume on January 23.
(This article was originally published in The Times of India)
