While government aims to assign unique numbers to a billion plus population for providing a portable identity and eliminating of ghosts from databases, it has spurred a public debate on the potential misuse of UID leading to infringement of individual privacy and liberty and data security

By Pratap Vikram Singh, e-Gov Bureau

As it is frequently quoted and known, if one goes to get a driver’s license, one must have a ration card, and to get a ration card one must have a birth certificate. Although the need for a standard identification proof is a common concern shared by most of the Indians, the situation is grim when it is related to identification of an individual residing in rural India. Courtesy the economic policy of the government and fairly genuine know your customer (KYC) norms of the banking sector, nearly eighty percent of the population, mostly residing in the country side, is estimated to be out of any formal banking and financial coverage.


Delivery of essential government to citizen services, especially the welfare and targeted programmes, meant for the lowest income group, is also marred with inefficiency and leakages. Subsequently, these very welfare programmes, which are operational under the inclusive agenda of the government, have become exclusionary. In addition, poor policy design and faulty databases make their contribution in bits and pieces in depriving the genuine beneficiaries of the proposed benefits and leaking out into the hands of people, falling in the above poverty line category.

To resolve the issue of precise targeting of the deserving beneficiaries and fixing  of the decades- old leakages, government has set up Unique  Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), chaired by Nandan Nilekani for building a national citizen database, leveraging information technology (IT) and  biometrics identity system, by assigning unique identification number —‘Aadhaar’ as UIDAI calls it—to every resident inside the Indian territorial boundary. It intends to, in the words of Nilekani, ‘get rid of our phantoms’,  eliminate the duplicate identities and ghost beneficiaries resting in several government databases, resulting in savings to the exchequer and promulgating  ‘inclusion’ through effective targeting of the beneficiaries.


However, parallel to  the UID advocacy, there are several concerns arising out of UID project. Several civil society organisations (CSO), rights activists and organisations  working on ICT for development domain are all pointing out the challenges in  integration of UID with the social sector schemes like Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee (MGNREG) programme and Public Distribution  System (PDS), among others, and questioning its projected effi- cacy in  facilitating inclusion. Moreover, there is a huge uproar on issues of infringement of individual privacy and liberty arising out of an increased  possibility of tracking and profiling of citizens by the state (the government) with the help of UID—the common thread interlinking various databases within  the government. UID, has one more time, spurred the public debate on drawing  of the thin-line between individual liberty and privacy and national  security. The drifting understanding on technology solutions, being a  replacement for good policy, rather an enabler, and pushing citizens into the  technological complexities and dependence, is another argument which is  being debated in India, as the government plans to go ahead with creating world’s largest citizen database, without much parliamentary debate and public  consultation.

Genesis

The genesis of a national identification project goes back to the year 1999. The government commissioned a Kargil Review  Committee, appointed in the wake of the Kargil War, in 1999, which submitted  its report the next year, and was referred to in the report of Inter Ministerial Group on Reforming the National Security System. The report said: “There  should be compulsory registration of citizens and non-citizens living in India…  All citizens should be given a Multi-Purpose National Identity Card (MNIC)  and non-citizens should be issued identity cards of a different colour and design.” Later, in 2003, the Government  of India gave approval for assigning MNIC at national scale to  each resident. However, in 2006, the Planning Commission conceived a similar  initiative, which aimed to provide unique identity number for each resident  across the country, which would be used primarily as the basis for efficient  delivery of welfare services.

Eventually, the government decided to collate the two parallely running  programmes of the time—the National Population Register under the  Citizenship Act, 1955 and the Unique Identification Number project of the Department of  Information Technology, with the forming of empowered group  of ministers (EGoM) to look into the feasibility of rolling out unique identifi- cation numbers to the residents.

On January 28, 2009, the Unique  Identification Authority of India was constituted and notified by the Planning  Commission as an attached office under the aegis of Planning Commission.  Nilekani, the co-founder of the second largest Bangalore based Indian IT power house, Infosys was appointed as Chairman by the Prime Minister of India. The  UIDAI aims to offer a strong form of online authentication, where agencies can compare demographic and biometric information of the resident with the  record stored in the central database.

Application

UIDAI is working on the principle that ‘inability to prove identity is one of the biggest barriers    preventing the poor from accessing benefits and  subsidies’.  In theory, UID is believed to reform the service delivery mechanism in the  country through its integration with the social sector schemes like PDS,  MGNREG, among others. The Identification Authority avers that the amount of  money that could be saved from pilferage in these development programmes  could be in the volume of tens of thousands of crores.

Currently, the Authority  is working on ‘defining the usage of the number’ across critical applications and  services. PDS, MGNREGS, Education, Public Health and Financial Inclusion, inter alia are few such applications. The Authority proposes that using Aadhaar  solely for identification would enable clear targeting of PDS beneficiaries, the  inclusion of marginal groups, and expanded coverage of the poor through the  elimination of fakes and duplicates.

The government intends to make a shift in the way PDS services are being delivered from a static, supply-led approach to a  demandled and dynamic approach, one which gives ‘power and choice to the  beneficiary’. It has been pointed out that the number would help residents  collect entitlements from any fair price shop (FPS) within the state.  Government would then replenish FPS stocks based on authentication-linked  off-take.

Needless to say that using Aadhaar in identification of beneficiaries in  PDS databases will eliminate duplicate and fake beneficiaries from the rolls, and  make identification for entitlements far more effective.

On UID application in  MGNREG, the Authority proposes its integration with job cards, muster rolls,  bank account and transaction authentication. UIDAI’s Working Paper on UID  application on MGNREG elaborates that the UID can fully replace the need to  provide supporting documentation for the standard KYC, which will make  opening a bank account significantly simpler.

The paper puts forth role of UID  in preventing ‘theft from beneficiaries and taxpayers’. It says that UID  authentication at the site of work could ensure a match between the hours claimed by the workers and the official supervising the site. Similarly, the  over-reporting on amount of work done, could be corroborated against the  wages paid to the beneficiaries, ‘establishing the execution of the project’.

“The  Aadhaar number can be employed in multiple applications, including the PDS  and NREGS, and in banking for the poor. While  Aadhaar cannot be a panacea for all the challenges which programmes such as the PDS or MNREGS  currently face, Aadhaar can be leveraged at various points in these programmes to improve the delivery systems by making them more  transparent, convenient and cost-effective,” R S Sharma, Director General and  Mission Director, Unique Identification Authority of India said.

He added: “The proposed authentication infrastructure of Aadhaar which will  enable a resident to authenticate his/her identity will be able to bring about the  accountability and transparency at the final delivery point and enforce the  no-transferability of entitlements in various programs.”

UID would facilitate financial inclusion in a bigger manner. While enabling  banking cover to the rural population, linkage with UID would facilitate  electronic micro transactions, very typical of the economic culture prevailing in villages. Direct cash transfer, on the place of subsidy, could be facilitated  much easily with linking UID to individual’s bank account. Providing a unique  identification to all the residents, especially the BPL population would  make them eligible for receiving direct cash transfer, without any intermediary  intervention.

Ashish Sanyal, former Senior Director, Department of IT said, “In my opinion  UID is the first correct step towards realisation of so-called Connected  Government or Joined-up Government.” He opined, “It is happening at a very  suitable time also, because, through implementation of National e-Governance  Plan, government is heading fast towards such a requirement, in order to derive  maximum benefits from some flagship schemes/programmes planned  under NeGP for country-wide roll-out.”

Moreover, security is yet another major application area where UID aims to  make a difference. UID proponents say that in a single identity paradigm, the  surveillance and monitoring of people would be far easier. The security agencies will be able to track the movements of people with relative ease.  Integration of the databases with help of UID is poised to transform the way  information and intelligence is gathered by the security agencies.

Providing a  cop’s perspective, T Krishna Prasad, Additional Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh said, “UID would be of particular significance in crime  prevention and detection, making identification of the person in dock much  easier.”

R S Praveen Kumar, Joint Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad said, “In  the existing situation, our databases of all departments are not integrated.  While we search for the criminals and offenders, the veracity of the person is a  big question mark. With UID and the networking of servers, across  departments, we will be able to see banking history, travel history, health  history of the person and zeroing in on the real culprit would be far much  easier.”

Purushottam Sharma, Inspector General of Police (IGP), Head, State  Crime Records Bureau (SCRB), Madhya Pradesh informed:“If Government of  India permits the police and other security agencies to utilise this UIDAI database – in future which I strongly believe that it will be granted- it will be  much benefi- cial in tracking of criminals and absconders.”

Perspective

As per  UIDAI’s understanding the inability to prove identity is one of the biggest  barriers preventing the poor from accessing benefits and subsidies. However,  this very principle is being debated by many civil society organisations (CSO)  working closely at the grassroots level.

Though some of the CSOs agree to the fact that lack of identity proof may be one  of the reasons behind poor state of service delivery and source of  exclusion, they point out towards the quid pro quo among the politicians,  administrators and local middle men and contractors, flaws in policy design,  and poor categorisation of BPL and APL as the real source of denial of services to the poor.

Commenting on this proposition of UIDAI, Sunil Abraham, Executive Director,  Centre for Internet and Society said: “Instead it is the lack of transparency in  the benefits and subsidies system. Corruption monitoring, systemic transparency and accountability – via right to information- and decentralised  public participation is the key to providing access to benefits and subsidies.”  Right activists are of the view that the pilferage of `20,000 crore is not because  poor people are defrauding each other. This scale of fraud is possible because  many rich and powerful people are involved and there is collusion by government officials.

As per the concerns raised by the civil society, although a cost benefit analysis  is yet to be done on UID project, a comparison between scope of UID  application in service delivery and its cost show that the cost outweighs  benefits, given the limited role of UID in fixing the loopholes in the social sector  schemes, which are primarily due to flaws in policies and processes.

United Kingdom in 2005 introduced an Identity Cards Bill in the Parliament,  primarily meant for ‘combating terrorism, reducing crime and illegal working,  reducing fraud and strengthening national security’. However, the bill faced  strong opposition from all sections of society, led by researchers and academia,  in face of issues arising out of data protection and privacy concerns.  In an assessment report, the department of information systems of London  School of Economics said: “The proposals are too complex, technically unsafe,  overly prescriptive and lack a foundation of public trust and confidence.”

Pointing that proposal missed key opportunities to establish a secure, trusted  and costeffective identity system, the report put forth consideration of  alternative models for an identity card scheme that may achieve the goals of the legislation more effectively. While providing cost estimation, LSE reported  that the likely cost of the ten-year rollout of the proposed identity cards  scheme could be between £10.6 billion and £19.2 billion, with a median of  £14.5 billion, substantially higher that the projected cost of the project by the  government.

On UID, while UIDAI has informed that the cost for each  enrollment is approximately INR150, there has been no public disclosure on the over all, long term cost of the UID project.

Privacy, Security and orwellian state

Privacy of the residents’ data is another major concern. Use of UID to  track citizens’ lives will go a long way in encroaching civil liberties. Besides,  India doesn’t have a stringent privacy law, as is the case in the US and other  European countries, which has a national citizen database. UID being the  common denominator in all the databases, mining information from databases of the government and market agencies would fetch complete information on  personal details about travel, health, communications and banking history of  an individual. “The actual objective of UID seems to track  large numbers of people, which fundamentally undermines citizens’ civil liberties,” Roy said. Given the quid pro quo between the politicians, bureaucrats, police, local  administrators and contractors, there is a high possibility of this enormous information being used against innocent citizens.

Data security of the central UID repository is yet another concern, which  assumes even greater proportions given the fact that the existing legislative  framework doesn’t address these issues. Legal experts are of the view that in  face of 26/11 Mumbai attacks, the government through Information  Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, have acquired huge unprecedented  powers for protecting national security and for interception, monitoring, decryption and blocking of electronic data and information transmitted  through computers, computer systems, computer networks, computer resources and communication devices within India. However, there has been  little or no action on ensuring data security and individual privacy for the  citizens.

Voicing his concern, Pawan Duggal, Lawyer, Supreme Court of India said that  despite the amendment of Information Technology Act, 2000, there is not  enough provisions therein relating to individual privacy and data security. India also does not have any dedicated legislation on privacy and data security.

While having an optimistic view that the UID project would not lead to an Orwellian state, Purushottam Sharma also pointed out to the imperative of  having stringent legislative mechanism to ensure privacy and data security. He  said: “The Government of India has to work on a [legislative] framework to  ensure the security of database and has to decide who can  access this UID database.”

The creation of national citizen database is a right move in the direction of  providing standard identification to all the residents, besides leveraging it for  providing the financial cover to 80 % of the population. Moreover, it could also  expedite the process of identification and prevention of criminal and crime, respectively, making the task of security agencies far more easier. It would lead to objectivising and catalysing the prosecution process.

However, the thin-line between individual liberty, privacy and national  security must not be blurred. “There is a need to draw a clear line between  concerns regarding national security and safeguarding individual privacy,”  Praveen Kumar opined. The government has the onus of devising objective,  transparent mechanism so that the transactional data, with a linkage to UID,  would not be misused by the people sitting at the helms of affair for profiling,  tracking and harassment of innocents. Some of the best bureaucrats and cops,  noted for their integrity and impeccable public career, share the concerns  about the vulnerability of misuse of data against the innocent residents – the  aam aadmi- in the country.

Pointing towards need for a transparent institutional mechanisms defining the  use of UID in individual tracking and profiling, Krishna Prasad said, “Cases of  phone tapping have been happening all the time. Post UID, it will be tracking of individual lifestyle and movements. You can’t stop it, as long as you don’t have  those transparent institutional mechanisms to deal with these issues.” It is an  imperative in the part of the government to devise stringent legislations which     may safeguard individual privacy and liberty.

There is an urgent crying need to come up with appropriate checks and  balances in this regard. “The government needs to do quite a lot in terms of  addressing the various legal policy and regulatory issues pertaining to UID in India, before implementing and launching it in a big way in India,” Duggal  affirmed

 

Be a part of Elets Collaborative Initiatives. Join Us for Upcoming Events and explore business opportunities. Like us on Facebook , connect with us on LinkedIn and follow us on Twitter, Instagram.

Related Article


whatsapp--v1