English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Aadhaar is a giant electronic mess, a serious threat, leads to a police state structure: Sr Advocate Divan to SC

Published

on

Aadhaar is a giant electronic mess, a serious threat, leads to a police state structure: Sr Advocate Divan to SC

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan on Wednesday (January 17) made a passionate plea to a Supreme Court constitution bench on why he thinks Aadhaar is not the best thing to have happened to India; in fact it is possibly a serious threat. He termed the entire Aadhaar programme a “giant electronic mess”.

In a speech that carried through most of the day (both before and after lunch), Divan told the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar, Adarsh Kumar Sikri, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan that Aadhaar has the potential to rob a person of his rights.

Divan was arguing on a petition by S G Vombatkere & Anr (vs Union of India & Ors. Respondents).

Before Divan, P Chidambaram had mentioned before the Chief Justice that Aadhaar had been passed as a money bill and he wanted to argue only on this aspect.

11.47 am: Divan started by saying: “There are so many regulations and notifications in this case. We have to consider them. There are so many circulars and notifications that have no connection with the main matter, but we have to look into them.”

11.51 am: The bench asked: “Are you going to challenge the Aadhaar programme first?”

Divan replied: “We have to make it clear what the purpose of the Aadhaar project is. This project came in 2009. We have to see if it constitutional or not. This project is a continuously growing project.

“We are challenging this project because of the collusion of a policy and technology. It is a giant electronic mess.”

12.00 pm: Divan also used the Kesavanand Bharti case to strengthen his case.

He said: “This project can track all the citizens and their activities. Firstly it was voluntary. The state issues a number which can be accessed by the government for tracking citizens and the state is empowered to switch it off.”

12.02 pm: He continued: “The constitution makes a balance between laws and life of citizens but the Aadhaar creates a mess between all this. Even banking is also connected, so the government can track our money expenditure and all.”

Then he listed some points such as:

– Tracking of banking and expenditure.

– Right to privacy.

– Identification of personal things like iris and fingerprints.

– Whether the Aadhaar database is secure or not for national security.

12.03 pm: Another writ petition was filed and tagged with the Aadhaar matter which refers issue of population census.

Divan continued: “Linking of Aadhaar with mobile services is also there which (the deadline) is extended till March 31.

“The iris and fingerprints are my personal identity and no one has the right to take it from me forcefully.

“On July 2, 2009 the chairman was appointed. The statute was not there at that time.”

12.08 pm: He also talked about the loopholes: “Fake Aadhaar numbers have also been generated. Several PILs were filed before the Supreme Court and this matter was transferred before constitutional bench.

“Adhaar is also used for LPG connections. The Jandhan Yojna is also linked with Aadhaar.”

12.09 pm: He pointed out that Aadhaar is voluntary so long as there was no judgment on it.

He said: “The E-KYC also came with linkage of Aadhaar. Re-verification has also come with all the existing mobile users for restricting money laundering.”

12.18 pm: There was more. He said: “S 139AA of the Income Tax Act is also connected with Aadhaar, so your bank accounts are connected, policies are connected mobiles are connected everything is connected with this.

“So the court passed an order saying linking Aadhaar with PAN is not mandatory. Even then the government said you cannot file your IT Returns without Aadhaar and PAN. Then the court saved the people from this.

“There are a large number of people who work on the field. Their rations are directly linked with Aadhaar. People are facing so much difficulty.”

12.21 pm: There were more issues, in the very collection process of the data itself, he pointed out. He said: “The biometrics are not being registered for a large number of people. And from age 15 to 18 the biometrics of a human being change. So how can it be possible to make it mandatory for those people?”

He also argued about linking Aadhaar with ration cards. He argued how someone living in a remote place can afford to get his or her ration if his or her ration card is yet to be linked to Aadhaar. That has been a long-standing issue that the government has refused to recognise. People have died because they have not been able to go to the fair price shop and give their finger prints, or could not because technical malfunctions.

12.40 pm: At this point Divan mentioned that there were Padmashree Award winners members of the national human rights committee among the petitioners. He also pointed out that there are some petitioners who worked with the group of people for national security.

12.50 pm: He continued: “They capture the fingerprints, facial and iris of individuals. These particular items are stored in the database.” He then pointed out the fallacy in this. “There are so many things which creates a bar while using these things, such as moisture, dust, tears in the eyes etc. in such cases you may be rejected. So the constitutional issue is, if I enjoy a right, where is the question of matching this?”

The hearings continued after lunch with Divan still speaking.

2.48 pm: He said: “Biometric is sensitive to everyone, like palm prints, voice etc. When you’re picking such sensitive information there should be a minimum governance. Biometrics is covered under no legislation. If we further go into the case, there is no governmental control over such gathering of sensitive information.

“Making Aadhaar mandatory at banks, work place etc. makes an individual vulnerable to surveillance. Aadhaar makes an individual tradable at all times. This is infringing his fundamental right. Electronic trail would be left with the Central government about information regarding the whereabouts of an individual. This would lead to aggregation of power. It leads to a police state structure. Is it even permissible to have such an architecture? It will soon become a surveillance society, the pace at which it is going on currently. Government, by transgression, is becoming dominating.”

3.01 pm: Then he hit at the heart of the matter: “Now we have a fundamental right to privacy, everything that happened between 2009 and 2016 should be nullified.

3.16 pm: The respondent (the government) in its  affidavit has submitted that Aadhaar gives people with no documentation an identity. About this Divan said: “Only 2,19,000 people registered in that particular category where Aadhaar was their first identity card.

3.43 pm: “Registrations were denied on technical grounds where biometrics of the people applying at a later stage were closely similar to people already registered. It is contended that such problems will grow as the number of registrations will create an anomalous situation.”

4pm: P Chidambaram came in with his arguments on the specific issue (the money bill) he wanted to talk about. He said: “Irregularity and illegality are two different things. If the Speaker certifies that a bill is a money bill then the Rajya Sabha becomes helpless.”

At that one of the counsels of the petitioner submitted: “No court should object if the speaker certifies, according to Parliament Act (UK) 1911.”

At that point the court was adjourned to Thursday.

India News

Ajit Pawar dismisses speculation on Supriya Sule joining BJP

Ajit Pawar has dismissed speculation about Supriya Sule joining the BJP, calling such rumours exaggerated and stressing that his focus remains on elections and development.

Published

on

Ajit Pawar

Amid renewed political speculation around Nationalist Congress Party–Sharad Pawar (NCP-SP) leader Supriya Sule’s future, Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar on Monday dismissed rumours of her joining the BJP, stating that he is “not an astrologer” and prefers to focus on governance and electoral outcomes rather than conjecture.

The remarks came after Sule publicly praised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for sending all-party delegations abroad following Operation Sindoor, triggering fresh political chatter in Maharashtra’s volatile landscape.

Ajit Pawar rejects political speculation

Responding to questions from the media, Ajit Pawar said speculative interpretations are often exaggerated and unnecessarily amplified.

“I am not an astrologer. Such speculative questions often become breaking news without reason. My focus is on development until January 15,” he said, seeking to put an end to the rumours.

On whether there is any possibility of the two factions of the Nationalist Congress Party coming together, Pawar said the immediate priority is electoral success.

“At present, our top priority is winning the elections. We are working with full effort to ensure a positive outcome,” he said.

On NCP reunification and family ties

Addressing broader questions on a possible reunification between the NCP and NCP-SP, Pawar used a familial analogy, suggesting that unity cannot be ruled out.

“We are one family. In every family, people come together during moments of happiness and sorrow. If family members decide to stand together, there is nothing wrong in that,” he said.

However, he did not indicate any concrete move or timeline for such a reunion.

Thackeray brothers’ reunion and voter behaviour

Commenting on the coming together of the Thackeray brothers, Pawar said the development could have electoral consequences.

“Shiv Sena (UBT) and MNS traditionally had different voter bases. With them coming together, vote division could reduce, which may benefit them electorally,” he said.

Pawar clarified that he played no role in facilitating the reunion but welcomed the move, calling it a positive development within a political family.

He also cautioned against assuming uniform voter consolidation, noting that voting behaviour varies across elections.

“Voters think differently in national, state and local elections. The results of the Lok Sabha and subsequent Assembly elections clearly show that,” he added.

On free facilities, local alliances and Mumbai remark

Responding to criticism over promises of free facilities, Pawar said such decisions rest with the Chief Minister at the state level and the Prime Minister at the national level. He added that at the local body level, his experience of over two decades guides his approach.

On alliances involving parties like the NCP, Shiv Sena and AIMIM in local bodies such as the Parli Municipal Corporation, Pawar said such arrangements are common and often finalised locally without involving senior leadership.

He also strongly rejected remarks by a BJP leader claiming Mumbai is not part of Maharashtra.

“Mumbai is in India, and within India, it is in Maharashtra. It will always remain a part of Maharashtra. Such statements are made around elections to draw attention,” Pawar said.

On Bharat Ratna for Sharad Pawar

When asked whether NCP founder Sharad Pawar should be awarded the Bharat Ratna, Ajit Pawar said the decision lies with the Central government.

“Sharad Pawar has served public life for over 60 years and taken many important decisions. Anyone is free to express an opinion, but the final call rests with the Centre,” he said.

Continue Reading

India News

PSLV comeback mission hit by third-stage anomaly during launch from Sriharikota

ISRO’s PSLV-C62 mission faced a third-stage anomaly around 30 minutes after launch, raising concerns over the rocket’s comeback flight after its 2025 failure.

Published

on

PSLV LAUNCH

At 10.18 am on Tuesday, the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)-C62 lifted off from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota, carrying 16 satellites into space. The launch marked the first PSLV mission of the year and was being closely watched as a comeback attempt following a failure in 2025.

Roughly 30 minutes after liftoff, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) stated that the mission had “encountered an anomaly” during its third stage. The space agency has initiated a detailed analysis but has not yet officially declared the mission a failure.

Third stage issue raises concerns again

The PSLV is a four-stage launch vehicle, with the first two stages reportedly performing as expected during Tuesday’s mission. The problem surfaced during the third stage, where deviation was observed.

ISRO chairman Dr V Narayanan said that a detailed assessment is underway. Historically, issues during the third stage of a rocket have often resulted in mission failure, although ISRO has so far avoided using that term for this launch.

The setback is significant as this was intended to be a recovery mission. The PSLV’s only launch in 2025 had also failed due to a third-stage issue. An analysis committee was formed after that failure, but its findings were not made public.

Mission payload and satellite loss

The mission aimed to place a surveillance satellite into orbit. The earth observation satellite, named Anvesha, was developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation. Alongside it, the PSLV carried 15 additional satellites from multiple countries, including Brazil, Nepal and the UK.

With the anomaly occurring mid-mission, these satellites are now believed to be lost.

Track record remains strong despite setback

The PSLV has completed 64 missions so far, with four failures recorded prior to this launch. If the current mission is eventually declared unsuccessful, it would mark the fifth failure, keeping the overall success rate relatively high.

However, the timing of the anomaly is a concern, given the growing reliance on PSLV for commercial and strategic launches.

Impact on space industry and future launches

The development is particularly worrying for private players in India’s expanding space ecosystem. Several start-ups had payloads on this mission, including Hyderabad-based Dhruva Space, which had placed seven satellites onboard.

The outcome also casts uncertainty over the planned industry-led PSLV launch scheduled for the first half of 2026. That mission is being developed with participation from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and Larsen and Toubro.

ISRO is expected to conduct a thorough investigation into the third-stage issue before finalising the status of the mission and outlining corrective measures.

Continue Reading

India News

Mani Shankar Aiyar’s remarks on Hindutva spark political backlash from BJP

Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar’s comments on Hindutva at a Kolkata debate have triggered sharp reactions from the BJP, escalating the Hinduism versus Hindutva debate.

Published

on

manishankar aiyer

Veteran Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar has triggered a political controversy after describing Hindutva as “Hinduism in paranoia” during a public debate in Kolkata, prompting a strong rebuttal from leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Aiyar made the remarks at a discussion titled “Hinduism needs protection from Hindutva”, organised by the Calcutta Debating Circle at the Calcutta Club on Sunday. Several political leaders, legal experts, historians and journalists participated in the debate.

Aiyar draws distinction between Hinduism and Hindutva

Speaking at the event, Aiyar argued that Hinduism and Hindutva are fundamentally different, describing Hinduism as a spiritual and civilisational faith, while calling Hindutva a political ideology that emerged in the early 20th century.

“Hindutva is Hinduism in paranoia. It asks 80 per cent Hindus to feel threatened by 14 per cent Muslims,” Aiyar said, adding that Hinduism had survived and flourished for thousands of years without the need for what he described as political protection.

He referred to incidents involving attacks by vigilante groups and criticised actions against individuals over religious practices, beef consumption and participation in Christmas celebrations. Aiyar also cited writings of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, contrasting them with the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and Swami Vivekananda, whom he described as proponents of non-violence and inclusivity.

According to Aiyar, “There is no way Gandhi’s or Vivekananda’s Hinduism can be protected or promoted by Savarkar’s Hindutva.”

BJP leaders push back strongly

Aiyar’s comments drew an immediate response from BJP leaders present at the debate and later from party spokespersons.

BJP MP Sudhanshu Trivedi questioned the framing of the debate itself, arguing that the term “Hindutva” refers to “Hindu tattva” or the essence of Hindu philosophy. He said that associating Hinduism with the suffix “ism” was misleading and dismissive of India’s indigenous traditions.

“When you cherish Hinduism, it is called Hindutva,” Trivedi said, rejecting the distinction drawn by Aiyar.

BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla accused Aiyar of repeatedly making remarks that, according to him, insult Sanatan Dharma. He claimed that the comments echoed the Congress party’s broader stance on Hindutva.

Poonawalla also referred to past statements by Congress leaders and said that Hindutva has been defined by the Supreme Court as a “way of life.” He accused the party of attempting to portray Hindutva as violent and divisive.

Political debate intensifies

The exchange has added to the ongoing political debate over the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, a subject that has remained contentious in Indian politics. While Aiyar defended his views as ideological and historical critique, BJP leaders framed the remarks as an attack on religious identity.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com