Day 10; Session 1- Kapil Sibal (KS ) :continues with arguments against Aadhaar. Compares Aadhar ID with National ID for Israel and points out that in Israel, information can be used only for purpose they are collected. No provision for metadata. #scobserver @KapilSibal
KS : Reads from Puttaswamy judgment (Right to Privacy case) which says that Information is power. Refers to very expensive acquisition of Whatsapp by Facebook to argue that these services are highly valued because of information access. #scobserver
cont -services like Whatsapp,Facebook,Uber have data but in silos unlike Aadhar, where all data are stored in centralised database and that makes it dangerous. In silos, the information is consequential, but under centralised database, it provides personality mapping.#scobserver
KS moves to specific provisions of Aadhaar Act- argues that S.3 says that Aadhaar is voluntary but govt has made it mandatory. On Sec 32, argues that log of info is created and stored each time, transaction is authenticated. However, the purpose for authentication not provided.
cont- Reads out Sec 57 and argues that this allows Aadhaar to be used for purposes other than those specified in the Act. Says that this is unconstitutional.
Argues that Aadhar architecture nullifies consent by making entitlements contingent on Aadhaar. #scobserver
Argues that Aadhar architecture nullifies consent by making entitlements contingent on Aadhaar. #scobserver
KS : argues that Aadhar Act doesnt meet test of proportionality and thus violates Art 14 and 21. For Act to meet proportionality test, 1) The objectives of Act are to be evaluated and 2)Policy has to be least restrictive way to achieve objective. cont. #scobserver
Argues that denying basic entitlements on failure to produce an ID card is denial of FR and the procedure doesnt meet the test of Art 14 and 21. Bench rises for lunch. To assemble at 2:30 @KapilSibal #scobserver.
