Industrialist Ratan Tata has the capacity to challenge a breach of his privacy in the Supreme Court. But what about the nearly 60 crore Indian residents who don’t know what will become of the biometric data being collected by UIDAI?
The leak of the Niira Radia tapes in India and thousands of US classified documents on WikiLeaks, has stirred up again the debate on privacy. Earlier this week, Tata group chairman Ratan Tata petitioned the Supreme Court to order the government to restrict the use of conversations contained in the tapes, on the grounds that making them public was a breach of his privacy. The WikiLeaks disclosures have exposed many decisions and processes in the US government that have become a serious embarrassment for its leaders. Some of these leaders are talking about punishing those responsible for the leaks.
It's all well for such influential business and political figures to argue in defence of their privacy. But do these standards apply to the common citizen anywhere, and more specifically in India? Many of such common people may not even be aware of this thing called 'privacy', leave the 'right to privacy'. Take the unique identification programme being conducted in India today.
In fact, according to some of the diplomatic files published by WikiLeaks, it is now known that some US officials had been trying to collect biometric and such other sensitive identification information about politicians and bureaucrats from the United Nations and some countries like South Korea, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Malaysia, Syria and even India.
In Mumbai last month, the US Consulate had asked for proof of identity and other details even from the Maharashtra chief minister and state deputy chief minister to be allowed to attend a programme with the US president during his visit to India. Of course, when the state government protested and threatened that the leaders would not attend the programme, the US authorities buckled down.
But that's a story about the powerful and famous. Besides, it's highly unlikely that the more than 60 crore Indians being targeted by the identification programme would refuse to be part of it, particularly if they were told that they stood to 'gain' from it. This is the tragedy of the unique identification (UID) number of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), headed by Infosys boss Nandan Nilekani.
This ambitious and expensive project uses biometric information like fingerprints, IRIS scans and face photos to create a UID number. The authority is roping in fat-profit organisations as its partners, which will very likely result in the database being used for targeted marketing. (Read: Fat profit institutions continue to board UID bandwagon http://www.moneylife.in/article/78/11136.html) In addition, many registrars have been roped in by UIDAI to undertake this enrolment. These agents are believed to be adding their own parameters while creating their own databases for business use. (Read: Is the UIDAI database vulnerable? http://www.moneylife.in/article/78/9594.html)
Normally this should have rung an alarm bell. But it seems there has been not reaction, let alone any action from UIDAI or the government. So, what is the control over these databases and what is there to prevent any unauthorised use of this data? There is a lighter side to this. An IT expert, who requested anonymity, suggested that it may not be long before the information collected in these databases comes out into the public domain, like in the case of the Radia tapes. "The interesting part is that once the fingerprints, pictures of irises and the DNA record of people become widely available, they will automatically lose their value for purposes of evidence or as a means of uniquely identifying anybody," he explained.
Another expert said, "Governments cannot be trusted with personal information. I think India will be better off with no ID cards as the whole world is becoming one seamless entity with just local governments focusing on local services. IDs are an intrusion into one's privacy. India should remain as it has been."
In an essay published at Forbes.com, security technologist and author Bruce Schneier, says, "As long as privacy isn't salient, and as long as companies are allowed to forcibly change social norms by limiting options, people will increasingly get used to less and less privacy. There is no malice on anyone's part here; it is just market forces in action. If we believe privacy is a social good, something necessary for democracy, liberty and human dignity, then we cannot rely on market forces to maintain it. Broad legislation protecting personal privacy by giving people control over their personal data is the only solution."
This means that unless the biometric data of the nearly 60 crore residents being collected by UIDAI is kept safe and the privacy of individuals' records is protected, the Aadhaar project could turn into a tool for Big Brother, the government.
The Supreme Court has issued notices to the union government as well as the two magazines on the Radia tapes asking for a reply in ten days. While matter of the tapes is not connected in any way to the UID issue, the outcome on the subject of privacy will be relevant. Repeated questions to UIDAI by email have remained unanswered.
New Delhi: A bill seeking to grant statutory powers and status to Nandan Nilekani-headed national body for issue of identification numbers to all citizens was introduced in the Rajya Sabha today, reports PTI.
The National Identification Authority of India (NIAI), constituted in January, 2009 is functioning as an executive body under the Planning Commission.
As the NIAI is expected to issue the identification numbers to citizens, it may require statutory powers to deal with issues like security and confidentiality of information, impersonation and unauthorised access to data.
However, it was felt that mere executive powers may not be adequate for the Authority to discharge its functions.
“It has been felt necessary to make it as a statutory authority for carrying out the functions of issuing identification numbers to residents in India in an effective manner,” the statement of objects and reasons of the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010, said.
The proposed legislation was introduced in the Upper House by minister of planning and parliamentary affairs V Narayansamy amidst din and shouting of slogans by the opposition, agitated over irregularities in allocation of second generation (2G) spectrum, as pointed out by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG).
The scheme was launched at Nandurbar, a tribal district in North Maharashtra in September.
“The scheme of unique identification involves collection of demographic information and biometric information from individuals for the purpose of issuing of unique identification numbers,” the bill said.
It has provisions for up to three years imprisonment besides penalties for any misuse of information.
“The authority shall take measures (including security safeguards) to ensure that information in the possession or control of the authority is secured and protected against any loss or unauthorised access...,” it said.
The authority will consist of a chairperson and two part-time members appointed by the Central government for a term of three years.
There is also a provision of an Identity Review Committee to check the pattern of usage of identification numbers.
The Cabinet had approved the bill on 24th September. The identification number will be issued to citizens except those in Jammu & Kashmir to ensure the authentication of individuals for access to benefits and services of government and other various schemes.
Earlier, the government had pegged an expenditure of Rs3023 crore by March 2011 and thereafter recurring establishment costs for the entire project to be completed by March 2014.
New Delhi: The government late Thursday said it is “actively considering” a request from the tobacco industry to increase the duration of display of a particular pictorial warning in cigarette packets, reports PTI.
There are two existing pictorial warnings like scorpion and damaged lungs while a new and stricter one—a cancer-stricken mouth—was to be depicted from 1st December. Such warnings are to be rotated every year.
Tobacco companies, which were under an impression that the timeline for ‘mouth cancer’ warning would get pushed back, had made representations to the health ministry seeking clarity on the matter.
They have insisted that the existing cigarette stocks lying with the retailers should be allowed to be sold first and if the new warning must come into effect then its duration should be increased to two or three years so that companies do not need to print new packets every year.
“While the health ministry advocates lessening use of tobacco, the request of the tobacco industry is being actively considered,” sources at the ministry said.
The state exchequer earns Rs27,000 crore revenue every year from sale of cigarettes and bidis.
Tobacco majors ITC and Godfrey Phillips India (GPI) have stopped production of cigarettes citing lack of clarity on the issue. An ITC spokesperson today said, “units (for making cigarettes) are shut because of the ambiguity in pictorial warnings to be carried from 1st December onwards.”
Similarly, production has been stalled since 1st December onwards at GPI’s two units in India. The development may cost the state exchequer Rs100 crore per day.