New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 12-digit unique identity number Aadhaar and its legal framework.
A Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and justices A.K. Sikri, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan heard the arguments over 38 sittings, spread over 113 days.
Aadhaar has become the bedrock of India’s government welfare programmes, the tax administration network and online financial transactions. Its architecture has been criticized by petitioners on the ground that it leads to surveillance by the state by tracking people or using their personal data. The petitioners said it violates an individual’s fundamental right to privacy. Issues with Unique Identification Authority of India’s (UIDAI’s) enrolment procedure that raised concerns about data breaches were also put forth.
The petitioners have asked if the Constitution of India sanctions the creation of a surveillance state, whether an individual’s personal autonomy extends to biometrics covering finger prints and iris scans, and if the collection of biometric information of citizens is backed by the rule of law.
The petitioners, who include leading non-government organizations, privacy campaigners, retired army officers, Magsaysay award winners and the government of West Bengal also sought answers from the centre over security concerns, and frequent Aadhaar data breaches.
Curbing terrorism, money laundering and black money and delivery of subsidies and benefits have been listed by the centre as “legitimate state interests” in rolling out Aadhaar.
The UIDAI refuted security concerns by maintaining that while 100% authentication success under Aadhaar was not possible, the law governing it took care of the same. It also claimed that Aadhaar had a 2,048-bit encryption key, which worked like a number lock, making it extremely secure.
Ajay Bhushan Pandey, the chief executive officer (CEO) of UIDAI has battled questions put forward by the court about past instances of data breach, sharing of data by private authentication user agencies and sharing of biometrics.
Introduction of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 as a money bill was defended by Attorney General K.K. Venugopal, who argued that even though the Act has ancillary provisions, its main objective was the delivery of benefits and services flowing out of the consolidated fund.
A total of 31 petitions were tagged by the Supreme Court and heard by the Constitution bench. They challenge several aspects of Aadhaar, including the use/sharing of data collected by UIDAI.
In path-breaking ruling on 24 August 2017, the apex court held that privacy is a fundamental right. In the process, it set the stage for the introduction of a privacy law. The government has appointed an expert group under former Supreme Court judge B.N. Srikrishna to make recommendations. By Mint
