#Aadhaar hearing. KVV about to complete. He continues on proportionality and how the Act has not done the balancing.
(Internet issues inside the Court.)
(Internet issues inside the Court.)
Continuing internet issues.
KVV now referring to misinterpretation of LokNiti order by Union and challenges cell phone linking.
KVV concludes by pressing for extension even in Section 7 notifications. Pleading with A-G not take this in an adversarial manner.
KVV now referring to misinterpretation of LokNiti order by Union and challenges cell phone linking.
KVV concludes by pressing for extension even in Section 7 notifications. Pleading with A-G not take this in an adversarial manner.
Senior Adv Anand Grover now begins his submissions. He appears for @mathew111938.
His first point is that there are vast swathes of the Aadhaar project not even regulated by the Aadhaar Act.
His first point is that there are vast swathes of the Aadhaar project not even regulated by the Aadhaar Act.
Refers to SRDH as his first illustration. Rubbishes the suggestion of Union that all Biometrics had been destroyed.
He says just pressing a delete button is not enough and that data destruction is a complex process including harddisk shredding etc.
He says just pressing a delete button is not enough and that data destruction is a complex process including harddisk shredding etc.
Grover: Refers to 2016 Strategy Overview document and how there is an admission of aggregation of transaction record. Such aggregation is unlawful and unconstitutional
Grover asserts that the very aim of Aadhaar is Section 57 to facilitate corporates to be able to accurately build profiles of people when all databases are seeded with Aadhaar.
Grover refers to Regulations providing for metadata collection in authentication transactions and says that is ultravires the Act also besides being unconstitutional.
Grover refers to UIDAI app of Update Client Lite and its faculties and shows how they have absolutely no regard for access control or privacy.
Grover closes up his first proposition that there are several parts of Aadhaar project that have no sanction by law and they should all be struck down straightaway irrespective of the constitutional vires of aadhaar Act.
Grover's second point is that Biometrics cannot and just does not work for the purpose and it is unreasonable to use for the purposes of the Act.
Refers to Biometrics Standards Committee report and then the Parliamentary Standing Committee report of 2011.
They knew fully well the limitations of biometrics and still continued!
They knew fully well the limitations of biometrics and still continued!
Refers to Hans Varghese Mathews paper, Iris POC and Kevin Bowyer paper on Iris ageing.
Now refers to the face authentication and its limitations.
Now refers to the face authentication and its limitations.
Then refers to how Section 5 of the Act constitutes an admission in effect.
Refers next to Nandini Nayak and Shikha Nehra study published in EPW sample study of PDS and Aadhaar.
Follws up with 2017 studies published by Prof. Reetika Khera.
Next comes to contracts with L-1 and how L-1 had virtually been given unlimited rights over data.
Refers to various provisions in the contract. Also refers to the background of L-1 and their antecedents. Clarifies to the Bench that they had notice of this and are parties to the petition and no statement is being made where they are not in a position to defend.
Grover next goes to security issues with the Aadhaar ecosystem. His written submissions point to all the security holes.
His proposition is that because you are dealing with personal data, you cannot lawfully collect or retain data if you cannot secure it to a reasonable level
His proposition is that because you are dealing with personal data, you cannot lawfully collect or retain data if you cannot secure it to a reasonable level
Court rises for lunch.
Grover continues. His detailed written submissions here: drive.google.com/a/advocatepras…
