Thread by @prasanna_s

#Aadhaar hearing continues. Attorney General continues his arguments.

Reading from page numbered 261 in
drive.google.com/a/advocatepras…

US Court of Appeals case. Deals with DNA storage of arrested persons.

CJI cautions A-G that this does not apply in this case as it is narrowly deals with offenders. A-G says he wants to read the portion relating to retention of DNA. CJI allows him to continue reading.

A-G: Court shall not base its reasoning on Hollywood fantasies.

DYC j says this does not arise in our case. We are not worried about misuse but we are worried about the use of power under 2 (g) of the Act. Leaving it to an administrative authority to define biometrics may not meet the proportionality test.

A-G says he will meet that point. He paraphrases it as an excessive delegation point. (Me thinks: No no no there are two distinct points. An independent stand-alone excessive delegation point and an independent proportionality-privacy relatable excessive delegation pt.)

A-G next reads a Fordham Law Journal article on how automated finger imaging does not violate privacy.

A-G emphasises the part in the article that asserts that finger imaging technology is 99.9% accurate.

Hey @jkillerl, is this Fordham note written by you when you were a JD candidate back in 1996?

A-G reads the following passage from the same journal note.

A-G says watching television every day is shocking...crime on the rise every day. Bank frauds totallin lakhs of crores. This will catch them all.

Sikri J laughingly says Bank frauds has got nothing to do with this.

A-G responds by citing benamis multiple identity based frauds

DYC J also joins Sikri J and says nothing in aadhaar prevents an individual operating a layer of commercial entities to do a chain of txns. Can't see how Aadhaar is going to help with detecting or preventing bank frauds. Say Section 7 frauds understandable (atmost!)

A-G now tries to justify based on vast majority are deprived in India etc.

Sikri J says inequality is increasing. No question of India having bridging inequalities.

Some debate on Trickle down economics (A-G refers to Gurucharan Das) and Sikri J referring to Prof Amartya Sen

DYC J says legitimacy of the interests involved here is a given. But the crux lies in proportionality.
How far can the state cast a net?

Sikri J takes the example of mobile aadhaar linking. Says what is the proportionality in suspecting everyone to be a terrorist.

A-G responds taking the example of Kashmir and says they shutdown internet to ensure stone throwers don't communicate with each other and assemble.

DYC J asks which terrorist applies for a cell phone? They may use...but do they apply?

Bench rises for lunch.

Pls follow @SFLCin for the second half proceedings. @gautambhatia88 and myself are unable to be here for the second half.