#Aadhaar hearing continues. Arvind P Datar, Sr. Advocate resumes his arguments for Petitioners.
APD lays his propositions. Submits on the Money Bill argument. How Aadhaar certification as a Money Bill is unconstitutional.
Explains how the word final in Article 110 (3) does not mean the certification is beyond judicial review and shows how there is a long line of precedent.
Explains how the word final in Article 110 (3) does not mean the certification is beyond judicial review and shows how there is a long line of precedent.
He will develop this point later.
The first one he will develop now is back to PMLA. And the consent form. The absurdity of giving consent in the form when you are mandated by law to link failing which your account is inoperable!
Wonders if consent should receive....
The first one he will develop now is back to PMLA. And the consent form. The absurdity of giving consent in the form when you are mandated by law to link failing which your account is inoperable!
Wonders if consent should receive....
...such shoddy treatment in a democracy.
Refers to RBI, TRAI, and IRDAI applications to modify 11.08.2015 order to allow them to link but how SC refused on 15.10.2015 order.
APD reads the statement of objects and reasons for Aadhaar Act. DYC J comments that it appears to confine to Section 7.
Bhushan J wants to know what is the problem with using aadhaar at other places. Like say a driving license.
APD says how His Lordship may not face it but others have to show their id card while entering airport. Using it for something like is different.
But to say one cannot
APD says how His Lordship may not face it but others have to show their id card while entering airport. Using it for something like is different.
But to say one cannot
..enter an airport without a driving license is absurd! (There is a sigh of satisfaction in the court).
APD now reading the parliament speeches starting witn Jairam Ramesh's objecting to Aadhaar Act and asking to eschew haste.
Emphasises how Section 57 was sought to be rejected and RS suggested an amendment to delete Section 57.
APD says therefore S 57 may be struck down if the Act has to be saved.
Then moves to the next argument on consent. How consent has been understood under jurisprudence as consensus ad idem since 1872 contract Act.
Then moves to the next argument on consent. How consent has been understood under jurisprudence as consensus ad idem since 1872 contract Act.
Under the Aadhaar Act, consent is almost treated as lawful mandate of submission to coercion!
He reads out US congress proceedings not allowing using SSN as the standard unique identifier across the States.
Including a senate proceedings that appear to echo all data aggregation and data surveillance issues at play in this case.
Including a senate proceedings that appear to echo all data aggregation and data surveillance issues at play in this case.
Reads proceedings in the Senate introducing the Privacy Act of 1974. (Me thinks: this is riveting)
APD propositions that after Puttaswamy Section 57 cannot stand.
Refers to the proviso and absurdity of law making giving 'consent' mandatory by laws such as PMLA Act.
Refers to how usage may be authorised by a "contract" in 57. Says it is shocking. Asks where the contract is between which parties?
DYC J wonders what is the compelling state interest anyway for pvt players to ask for aadhaar! Section 7 is understandable. APD agrees. Says ....
DYC J wonders what is the compelling state interest anyway for pvt players to ask for aadhaar! Section 7 is understandable. APD agrees. Says ....
...everything outside Sec 7 is suspect for this reason. But Section 7 is bad for other reasons.
Goes into the absurdity of Tirupati requiring aadhaar for darshan!
(Me thinks: Amazed that TTD does not have a twitter handle).
Goes into the absurdity of Tirupati requiring aadhaar for darshan!
(Me thinks: Amazed that TTD does not have a twitter handle).
Next submission of APD is that "any purpose" cannot be all purposes.
Next submission of APD is on excessive delegation. Definitions of biometrics and corebiometrics cannot be left to the executive but legislature has to define that.
Next submission is on Section 7 and refers to how it causes so much exclusion and also refers to Eco Survey 2016 and 2017 noting more than 49% exclusion in Jharkhand.
Manifest arbitrariness. Destroys existing identities. Constitutional rights such as right to food...
Manifest arbitrariness. Destroys existing identities. Constitutional rights such as right to food...
...cannot be made contingent on a faulty probabilistic method. If this is not manifest arbitrariness, nothing is!
Refers to Swaraj Abhiyan 2016 7 SCC 498 judgment as to how SC directed that the govt that even ration card is just in the nature of evidence aliunde and cannot be insisted upon for disbursement of grain.
Next submission of APD is challenge to Regulations of auth Regulations 14, 27 and 28 as manifestly arbitrary.
Also Regulation 29. Refers to absolute shocking reference to Children aadhaar numbers being deactivated automatically at 5 years.
Also Regulation 29. Refers to absolute shocking reference to Children aadhaar numbers being deactivated automatically at 5 years.
Next submission is on 139AA of the Act. Says Binoy Viswam para 108 requires reconsideration.
SikriJ says he understands the same after Justice Nariman judgment in Triple Talaq case and Puttaswamy judgment.
SikriJ says he understands the same after Justice Nariman judgment in Triple Talaq case and Puttaswamy judgment.
Refers again to 139AA absurdity of exercise of a right under one Act entailing penal consequences is another. Unreasonable classification and manifest arbitrariness.
Comments on the foolproofness of Aadhaar deduplication and the cunning of ITD to make Aadhaar necessary for uploading the return....despite the judgment in Binoy Viswam.
Refers to how people can just get their return processed with 12 0s.
Says in his four decades as tax lawyer, he can only laugh at the suggestion that linking PAN with aadhaar will cure black money! DYC J has a wry smile.
APD submits that similarly people who have aadhaar but do not want to link have that choice and cannot be mandated to link.
His next argument is on Article 73. He says when a Bill is under consideration, Article 73 powers cannot be read as unbridled.
Brings up brazen violations of SC orders again and again inexplicable in aadhaar case. Contrasts with how in the highways liquor and jallikattu cases everyone fell in line but in Aadhaar alone there is inexplicable impunity.
Court rises for lunch.
Court rises for lunch.
