Lack of awareness due to illiteracyIn India there have been many cases reported as to thepotential threat attatched to aadhar there have been serious security issuesgoing on with regard to it.
It has been under keen observation by uidai thatthere are many e-commerce sites which are charging a particulat amount to printthe aadhar card in the same manner by giving shape of the smard card just likeatm cards and the material is a plastic material used and the amount charged bythese e-commerce sites vary between Rs 50-200.The concerned authority hasclearly ststed that there is no such concept of smard card that if u get youraashar in the shape of smart card then only it will be taken as a proof by thegovernment even having the details in a normal sheet of paper is suffice totreat aadhar as a so called proof by the government of india .The uidai haswarned various e commerce site to stop printinmg the aadhar in the way of smartcard and made it punishable if practiced by any ecommerce site under Indian penalcode.Leakages of aadhar card details of about 14 lakhpensioner has brought the focus of the people in spreading the awareness areport stated by TIMES OF INDIA therefore admitting the lack of awareness withregard to the information technology act the director has made a point andtherefore implemented to circulate the copies of all it related acts to variousdepartment of the government thereby protecting the details and right of thecitizens.Supreme court findings and judgementsThe establishment of so called concerned issue ofthe nation with regard to aadhar cardhas led the Supreme Court of India to interfere. On 20th November of 2012, the legislative and thestate approached the Supreme Court ofIndia where the court listenedto thearguments against National Identification Authority of India Bill 2010 whichpossibly in contaven tion with Article 73 of Constitution of India which states”Extent of the executive power of the Union, states that, Subject to theprovisions of this Constitution, the executive power of the Union shall extendto the matters with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws and tothe exercise of such rights, authority and jurisdiction as are exercisable bythe Government of India by virtue of any treaty or agreement.
Case lawsTwo Constitution Bench judgments — Sharma (1954), aneight-judge decision, and Kharak Singh (1962), a six-judge judgment — held thatthe Right to Privacy was not a fundamental right. In Govind vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1975), theSupreme Court held that “many of the fundamental·rights of citizens can be described as contributing to the Right to Privacy”.
Theapproach to interpretation of fundamental rights had undergone a seriousfundamental change. The scope of article 21 of Constitution was expandedthrough the later judgments. Therefore in Govind the Benchcleared thr basic concern with the Rightto Privacy as not an absolute right and must be subject to restriction on thebasis of compelling public interest .In Maneka Gandhi (1978), the SC held that any lawand procedure authorizing interference with· personalliberty and Right of Privacy must also be right, just, and fair, and notarbitrary, fanciful, or oppressive.” In RRajagopal vs State of Tamil Nadu (1994), Supreme Court held that the Right toPrivacy is implicit in, the right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21.A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family,marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education among othermatters. From these rulings, it can be inferred that though the Constitutiondoes not specify ‘right to privacy’ as a fundamental right, but the subject hasevolved considerably in India, and privacy is now seen as an ingredient ofpersonal liberty Discussions on the main issue of aadhar cardEvery citizen has a right to data protection anddata privacy residing in this countryand every citizen must be aware of that.
Every IT technician’s main focus is tomake sure that strongest security shouldbe there so that no breach can take place. Though there may not be a Network that is 100% secure but if not 100% secure, thereshould be a good legislation or instead a system to deal with data violationcases. In India some of the Data Privacy and Protection laws are included underthe sections of ‘IT Act (2008)’, and many are yet to be implemented and areunder the perview of consideration. In aadhar act there are few issues which are ofconcern need to be understood firstly itis of great concern to know that aadhar is not a unique identification ratherit is just a simple number with nouniqueness in it.
It lacks the security feature unlike Pan card and Voter id .so many copies of aadhar can be downloaded from their SSUP portal. Yet, it isused as valid proof of identity at some places.
Aadhaaris used as proof of address. UIDAI does not verify the address of the citizens.Even though it is regsarded and accepted as a proof in various telecom andbanking companies. Aadhaar cannot be used as a proof of citizenship as Clause 9of Chapter III Aadhaar Act 2016 which clearly states that “The Aadhaar numberor the authentication thereof shall not, by itself, confer any right of, or beproof of, citizenship or domicile in respect of an Aadhaar number holder.”Also, Aadhaar Act 2016, Chapter I Clause 2(v) states that “If a resident whohas resided in India for more than 182 days or more than that is applicable toenrol for Aadhaar”. For applying passport, Aadhaar can be used as a validdocument for proof of concept and on the other hand, passport becomes a proofof citizenship which has lead to various immigrants from Nepal, Bangladesh,Bhutan etc.
to get valid documents for Indian Citizenship. ? Recently,twitter’s top story was MS Dhoni Aadhaar data got leaked which also depictssome flaws in Aadhaar Act which is Chapter VI Clause 4 of Aadhaar Act 2016depicts that “No Aadhaar number or core biometric information collected orcreated under this Act in respect of an Aadhaar number holder shall bepublished, displayed or posted publicly, except for the purposes as may bespecified by regulations.” Also Clause 30 of IT Act 2000 states that biometricor demographic data are recognized as an ‘electronic and sensitive data of anindividual’ and Chapter VII Clause 37 of Aadhaar Act 2016 states “Whoever,intentionally discloses, transmits, copies or otherwise disseminates anyidentity information collected in the course of enrolment or authentication toany person not authorised under this Act or regulations made there under or incontravention of any agreement or arrangement entered into pursuant to theprovisions of this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term whichmay extend to three years or with a fine which may extend to ten thousandrupees or, in the case of a company, with a fine which may extend to one lakhrupees or with both”.