Aadhaar Day 20, Session 2. AG to continue the case for the Union.
AG says that Section 12 of the National Food Security Act envisages the use of Aadhaar for better targeting and computerisation, and for unique identification.
AG says that Section 12 of the National Food Security Act envisages the use of Aadhaar for better targeting and computerisation, and for unique identification.
AG reads out the SC's judgment on Aadhaar/PAN (from last June), and says that in that case, the objectives of Aadhaar had been endorsed by a bench of Justices Sikri and Bhushan.
AG reads out the part of the Aadhaar/PAN judgment that cited Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen on the need of sustainable development.
AG reads out the part of the Aadhaar/PAN judgment that spoke about ghosts in the system, and cited Rajeev Gandhi's aphorism that out of 100 rupees of welfare, only 15 reach the intended beneficiary.
AG reads out the part of the Aadhaar/PAN judgment that spoke about cracking down on black money and money laundering, and the problem of multiple PAN numbers, and the benefits of centralised systems like the UIDAI to combat this, as well as combat terrorism.
The AG reads out the part of the Aadhaar/PAN judgment that says that Aadhaar is the most robust way to achieve deduplication.
AG reads out the part of the Aadhaar/PAN judgment that rejected the Article 14 challenge.
You can read the judgment here:
indiankanoon.org/doc/51782092/
indiankanoon.org/doc/51782092/
Sikri J asks how pensions fall within section 7 of the Aadhaar Act, because pension is a right.
AG says that there are fake pension cards.
Sikri J says that this becomes relevant in the context of exclusion.
AG repeats that nobody who has been excluded has come to the Court.
AG says that there are fake pension cards.
Sikri J says that this becomes relevant in the context of exclusion.
AG repeats that nobody who has been excluded has come to the Court.
Chandrachud J says that some of the rough edges of the Law may need to be softened, to avoid exclusion.
AG says that they can deal with a specific case if someone complains, but nobody has complained.
AG says that they can deal with a specific case if someone complains, but nobody has complained.
Sorry, the network in Courtroom 1 is terrible. There has been some more discussion on pensions. AG had cited a World Bank Report saying they UID should be universal and everybody should have it. Chandrachud J has asked how "subsidies, benefits and services" should be understood.
Network still bad AG has argued that poverty is a violation of human rights He has cited Roosevelt, Nelson Mandela and the UN. He says that on the one side you have the human rights of 300 million poor people. On the other side you have a state of mind
AG says that this Court can see where the balance lies
AG says that there are mechanisms under the regulations to ensure seamless delivery of benefits. Until the point an individual gets an Aadhaar, he is allowed to use alternative forms of ID. If biometric fails, then an individual shall be given the benefit on showing Aadhaar no.
AG reads out various other handling mechanisms such as doorstep delivery and notifications from the Ministry of Food He says that this is an ongoing process
AG says that after the World Bank Report, there cannot be a second thought about the benefits of Aadhaar. He hands over the report titled Identification for Development
AG reads out the Foreward of the World Bank Report which says that official identification is more than a convenience, it is a fundamental human right.
AG reads out the part of the World Bank Report that says that a lack of identification specifically affects women and children adversely.
AG reads out the part of the Report that talks about delivery of services to the poor and making everyone count by delivering an identity.
AG says that the World Bank has stated that this would help development and that it should be a universal.
Sikri J asks that if your only goal is identification, what is the need for centralisation and aggregation? Sikri J asks whether this is proportionate.
Sikri J takes the example of Singapore, where the data remains on the card
AG says that all this will be explained by the CEO of UIDAI in his presentation tomorrow. AG says that aggregation is not possible with Aadhaar.
AG says that the CIDR does not have the purpose of the transaction.
Bench rises.
Some discussion on the presentation to be made by the CEO. CJI says that first you give it to us in word format.
KV Viswanathan says that if there will be a presentation, then there must be a right to cross examination by the Petitioners
Chandrachud J says that there can't be a freewheeling cross examination. Questions can be placed through the CJI. All this will be decided tomorrow
To continue tomorrow at 11 30.
Cheers
