Argues on the point of purpose limitation. Says there's no purpose limitation in case of Aadhaar.
Reads the excerpts showing power of metadata.
Further reads another resolution passed in 2014 on surveillance.
Says that collection, aggregation and retention of personal data under Aadhaar has has no defined purpose and thus doesn't meet the test of proportionality and strict necessity.
Reads relevant excerpts from the case.
Reads:"it will not be enough that the measures are targeted to find certain needles in a haystack; the proper measure is the impact of the measures...
Reads "The possibility of any wild exercise of such power may be remote but then on the framing of Section 73, the provision impugned herein, the possibility cannot be ruled out."
Refers to Jeremy Bentham's idea of ideal security institution- Panopticon for reforming inmates.
Assuming biometric technology is not bad, then least intrusive method is using a card with a chip which stores the biometrics.
Submits that definition of biometric info is open-ended.
Asks why should Aadhaar data be given less protection then when it contains more sensitive data?
Says that in case of phones or Google servers which have multiple interfaces, possibility of collation of data is not there since GDPR stops them from doing so.
Says that personal data belongs to individual and not the State. It cannot be nationalised.
Says that question of conscientious objective was well known to the makers of constitution.
Talks about section 2(k). Says much has been discussed about Biometrics but not demographic data collected under the #aadhaar act