R.S. Sharma's response (“UIDAI clarifies on Aadhaar,” Op-Ed Page, Sept.15) to my article titled “Aadhaar: On a platform of myths” (Edit Page, July 18) demands comprehensive rebuttal. In my article, I had raised three arguments related to Aadhaar. In these three respects, I characterised the arguments of the government as “myths”. Mr. Sharma tries to refute my arguments and calls them “half-truths”. This response is to challenge Mr. Sharma to point out where exactly are the half-truths in my article.
My first argument was on the compulsoriness of Aadhaar, sought to be thrust through its linkages with the Home Ministry's National Population Register (NPR). I stand by it. The NPR is a part of the larger Multi-purpose National Identity Card (MNIC) project, begun after the Kargil war to cleanse India of “illegal immigration”. Registration in the NPR is compulsory. The information about individuals that is compulsorily required in the NPR includes a “National Identity Number”. It is the UIDAI's mandate to provide de-duplicated ID numbers to the NPR; and the ID number that would appear in the NPR will be the Aadhaar number. To quote Home Minister P. Chidambaram: “The MNIC has to be issued to every citizen, for which the Government has decided to set up a UID authority.”
However, there is no mention of the collection of biometrics of individuals in Citizenship Rules 2003, which empowers the NPR. The collection of biometrics was stealthily made part of the NPR sometime after 2003. This stealth measure allowed the UIDAI to piggyback on NPR, thus allowing for quick enrolment. Mr. Sharma's effort is to hide this link, by stating that Registrar-General of India is just one of UIDAI's many Registrars. But are not the RGI and the UIDAI arms of the same government? Or, is it that the UIDAI considers control of “illegal immigration” as a “developmental initiative”?
Secondly, at four places in his response, Mr. Sharma states that Aadhaar is not comparable with identity initiatives in the West. At no place, however, does he state what the specific problem in such a comparison is. Mr. Sharma cherry-picks from the U.S. federal statute to make his overstretched claim that the Social Security Number (SSN) is necessitated by law in the U.S. Yet, he neatly overlooks my arguments based on the U.S. President's “Strategic Plan” in 2007, which aimed to reduce/eliminate the use of SSN to identify individuals. How can Mr. Sharma claim that the SSN has “evolved” into a “de-facto identifier” in the U.S., when its own President is trying to reduce/eliminate its use?
Thirdly, Mr. Sharma' position that biometric technology has “limitations” and will be used only “as appropriate and as required” represents an enormous climb-down from the UIDAI's earlier claims that biometric errors are insignificant. It is plausible that this climb-down is inspired by the enormous difficulties faced by the UIDAI in de-duplication and the rising costs therein.
There is much to write about errors of biometrics, but it would suffice here to state that the UIDAI's Biometric Standards Committee had listed the limitations of this technology in its 2009 report. While noting the possibility of high error rates in using fingerprints under normal conditions, this report had shied away from providing any estimates of error in the use of IRIS images, owing to the “absence of empirical Indian data”. It suggested the use of IRIS images only “if they [the UIDAI] feel it is required”.
However, this cautionary note did not prevent the UIDAI from plunging into IRIS data collection, even as no cost-benefit analysis for the overall project is anywhere in sight. Will anyone in the government stand up and be accountable for these spending decisions?
(R. Ramakumar is with the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai)
Keywords: Aadhar project, Unique ID card, UIDAI, National Population Register
Comments:
Coming to Mr Ramkumar's wish that a clear cut law be passed that will make Aadhar compulsory ; I agree. The government should immediately pass a law that will do away with tenuous linkages of the past as claimed by Mr Ramkumar. Coming to biometrics, The Hindu need not publish such clarifications of a social scientist on technical matters - from the Tata Group TCS which implemented the National Stock Exchange software is a better bet.Our fingerprints are stored by banks and we can draw lakhs of rupees based on this. Why do people not complain about this and possible theft of data from here ? In addition Aadhar shows up a photograph and iris scan. The combination of all three is rather impressive and prima facie foolproof. The government should also pass a law that says that all these three attributes should be matched for identification and that should eliminate all voices with querulous doubts. Someone once duplicated a fingerprint of his wife in Rs 30/- ; can he change his face?
UID project is a bold experiment with ambitious goals. The amount of money that is being spent on it is peanuts compared to what we spend on so-called welfare schemes. Even if it proves to be partly successful, it is definitely worth the effort and money. May be, some lessons will be learnt, which will be of great use in future. Anti-UID lobby should come out of this mentality of criticizing every move without offering some better alternatives.
Biometrics is to help the Eugenicists invent or test their most sophisticated bio-weapons in order to improve the accuracy of targeting specific ethnic groups. Caroll Quigley, a Harvard university professor in his book 'Tragedy & Hope' wrote in 1968 that "The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching (plan), nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole" Those who run the government of India is just setting up the stage for the Builderbergers.
Mr Sharma said that only those who enrol for aadhar will be given UIDAI number.NPR is just one way through which enrolment can be done.But it seems there is more to it.Can UIDAI come clear on it and answer the broader aspects of the questions raised rather than making bland statements like ' they are half truths' .It is clear from the official response that came previously that there is lack of clarity in what UIDAI is doing which is giving room for different interpretations.If the initiative is developmental why this secrecy.Or will it take another 2 months to see an answer to this?
Sir, do you a better solution in mind or have only critisism to offer? What so big deal if govt. or govt. appointed agency keeps record of my bio. data? I dont have any problem personally with this and I guess most of us too wont have. I am of opinion that govt. must make it mandatory of all to enroll for UID. Though no technology would be able to offer a 100% perfect solution, what has been decided currently seems an appropriate choice.
Hello Mr. Ramakumar: I am not sure about your first two points because I don't have enough information. I hope R. S. Sharma will respond to your points. But on the limitations of biometrics, R. S. Sharma has given reasonable argument. UIDAI is trying to capture multiple biometric attributes to reduce error to such level it is negligible from operation point of view. He is also suggesting exceptional handling scenario for cases in which system fails to enrol a person or authenticate a person. I hope UIDAI will give all efforts to protect citizen's data and make sure that Registrar will not leak enrolled person's details.From cost-benefit analysis point of view, UIDAI project is far better compare to problem that people faces on daily basis. It should also help to make administrative reform to reduce leakages and corruption. If gain of such reform linked to UIDAI is consider then 17000+ crore cost of UIDAI is negligible.
@saurabh it's like saying a technocrat shouldn't do a social project because it comes under social science.Mr Ramkumar has pointed out there is no feasibility study conducted.And technology is not the domain of a few elite beings that people in other domains cannot understand.
Some people try to gain cheap publicity by Criticizing something very good like people criticize Google too on same privacy thing. I am not sure why and what this people want to hide from Government ?? Please go ahead Mr. R.S. Sharma, we are with you.
Even I read an analysis that the biometric tech has limitations. If you increase the accuracy of matching, there are less chances that the image stored will match with the actual one. need to keep im mind that majority of Indian workers use their hand for daily job (like agriculture) and its likely that there could be changes. If you reduce the accuracy, the probability of multiple matching goes high. Moreover how many of our villages have internet connectivity (they say development has not reached the poor villages)? How much do we need to set up the infrastructure for this?
@Saurabh- if you know software, you should also know that the requirement comes from people who major in social sciences. Your bank storing fingerprints rationale was preschool material. Banks do not share your fingerprints with other agencies. And for the record, I am a techie. @Vikas - how about this hypothetical situation: You get into a fight with a powerful person, he/she bribes some one in UIDAI and they delete/modify your data. Lo! you do not even exist!
I do not understand this hullabaloo over privacy of bio-metric data. Even if the entire data captured by UIDAI is put on the internet, heavens are not going to fall. Only some armchair thinkers are raising this bogey of secrecy and privacy. Hundreds of UID applicants standing in lines for hours for their UID number are a befitting reply to the specious arguments raised by Mr. Ramakumar.
The writer's contentions are typical of a negative mindset toward any good initiative by emphasizing how it cannot be or should not be done. Mr. Ram Kumar's repudiation of social security number (SSN) as as a "defacto identifier" in the United States, is not only a half truth but a complete misinformation. SSN continues to be a unique identifier in the United States. Bottomline is that UIDAI is a maiden initiative of its own kind which is happening in India for the first time. Its success dependes upon people understanding its usefulness and adopting it, notwithstanding the initial glitches and shortcomings in the entire process. Alternative to UIDAI is the status quo, which is not an option under the present circumstances.
Shahid - Every transaction in every computer can be deleted. This means we should do away with computers and stop computer based systems. Your contention is right. All the computer records and personal data in banks, insurance companies, government databases can be deleted and the identity of that customer in that institution compromised.
Michigan State University announced Sept 9 2011 that it has licensed cutting-edge software developed by Anil K. Jain that detects altered fingerprints to Morpho, part of the Safran group, one of the world's leading suppliers of identification and detection solutions.The widespread use of fingerprint recognition systems has led some individuals to disfigure or surgically change their fingerprints to mask their identities. The technology, developed by Jain, an Indian American university distinguished professor of computer science and engineering at MSU, can help law enforcement and border control officials detect these altered fingerprints. Thiefs and cops are one stage of each other always ! Yes, some good news then for those who believe altered fingerprints will rule in India post Aadhar. Truth is this should be one in ten million case - people are so poor they will be happy to receive the Rs 1000 per month that the government may give ! They will not attempt to monkey around.
Mr.Nilekani is doing a good job. Let him do it for the benefit of all Indians.
Mr.Ramkumar,you had better confine yourself to some social sciences.That will do a world of good to you and others like you. why dabble in subjects like biometrics,securities and all that? Didn't people like you heckle Mr. Rajiv Gandhi when he was trying to introduce personal computers in the country in 80s?The trouble in this country is whenever anybody is trying to sell a better idea to pull the country out of its morass, we will have to face this kind of logic-chopping and hair-splitting on every issue worth the name without a solution of their own.Well, go ahead Mr.Nielkani and Mr. R.S. Sharma;we are with you
I think most of the people who are so blindly in support of UIDAI should look beyond the stated goals and more into the implementation part and the FINE PRINT. All our PLANS since last 60 years have had lofty Goals but fizzle in Implementation. So if anybody is raising an issue to tread cautiously and review this HUGE exercise, we should not get all fundamentalist on him. First of all, if I have an issue with ID theft and dont want to share my info, still i will be compelled to do so. So where goes my freedom of refusal? Secondly, the issue of 'illegal immigration'. From whatever i have read, I did not get much clarity if we are planning to include immigrants in developmental schemes or exclude them. Whatever we do, the issue is it should not be done covertly But only in a Transparent manner.
I read this interesting article, and equally good comments.
I would like to say that the initiative is good and a very good sign for the development and prosperity of the country.
Mr. Ram Kumar, i would like to say i've seen many people from research institutions fail on their ideas, you miss the connect dude, just go out to the remotest of the village and see the prosperity, i would say that many NGO's in the name of social welfare do a lot of social work, talk about rights of people, welfare scheme implementation and lure those poor folks and finally leave them in lurch as the members of the organization only makes money. when you see the underprivileged and they being harassed u get the notion why every one needs an identity..
I hope the Aadhaar project will if not eradicate it completely but surely tone it down, largely resulting in benefit for our fellow citizens.
Dear Sir, On 22-4-2010, I sent an email to Mr. Nandan Nilekani via the email address viz webadmin-uidai@nic.in so as to share the following information regarding the uniqueness of ORCID and its relevance to the success of India's UID. An article in Nature (17Dec2009)(V.462, pp.825) which speaks about ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) which would be an alphanumeric string that uniquely identifies an individual scientist in much the same way that a Digital Object Identifier uniquely identifies a paper or other scholarly publications. ORCID project is backed by 23 organizations, including Thomson Reuters, Nature Publishing Group, Elsevier, ProQuest, Springer, British Library and the Wellcome Trust.” The success of Unique Identification (UI) depends upon the Investment (viz Personnel, Budget and Time) earmarked to study Theoretically the issues of UI so as to verify the same Experimentally before Applying the UI in the practical Social Environments. Hence let us deliberate and concentrate on the Scientific issues of UI by making use of the feedbacks from Home Ministry as well as from other Stake Holders so as to achieve the objectives of India's UID.