Aadhaar Will ‘Destroy Political, Social Choices’, Shyam Divan Argues In Supreme Court
There is complete collision between the Aadhaar Act and Section 139AA, says Divan.
Making Aadhaar mandatory for filing income tax returns and obtaining a Permanent Account Number (PAN) will “destroy political and social choices”, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
Responding to the arguments made by the government before the apex court on Tuesday, Divan said there is complete collision between the Aadhaar Act and Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He was arguing on behalf of one of the petitioners in the Aadhaar-PAN linkage case.
The UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India) website as of this morning says Aadhaar is voluntary. The FAQs on the website say ‘you can choose to apply for Aadhaar’. In the their ads they say it is voluntary.Shyam Divan, Senior Advocate
Citing a report in the Times of India, Divan said Aadhaar is even needed to obtain a birth certificate in some places.
“You have an Aadhaar number before you have a name. What are we coming to? It is going to destroy your political and social choices,” Divan added.
He said this is an issue that involves highest level of civil liberties and also from the safety point of view, the entire architecture is seriously flawed. “They say it is the best method, I say it is the worst.”
Reading a list of companies which are collecting Aadhaar data, Divan argued, “How can you compel me to give my data to a third party. I can still understand that the State wants my information. But Pankaj Shah of Bits and Bytes?”
People have replicated biometrics using a photograph and Fevicol... if your fingerprints are stolen, you are finished. My identity is over.Shyam Divan, Senior Advocate
Also Read: Who Has Your Aadhaar Data?
“Why did dog not bark when the horse was spirited out? Because the owner was the thief,” Divan said referring to Arthur Conan Doyle's The Adventures of Silver Blaze.
In the hearing which began on April 29, the government, represented by Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, had raised the problem of fake PAN being used, while the petitioners had said the government’s directive is unconstitutional.
On Tuesday, Rohatgi argued that right over one’s body is not absolute and called the arguments of bodily intrusion to take biometric data for Aadhaar as “bogus”.
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, who is representing another petitioner against Aadhaar-PAN linkage, will conclude his arguments on Thursday.