*UID is Against Basic Human Values*

Apropos the piece "A unique liberal dilemma"(Indian Express, 24 September),
after the last UK elections, its clear that the campaign for citizens'
sovereignty in India directed against the UID project (Aadhar or Niraadhar)
is most representative of the majority of Indians across all classes and all
democracies. In a December 2008 paper of Population Council, New Delhi, it
is estimated that 258 million adults in India are migrants, of which the
majority are men migrating for employment. While there is an existing
Inter-state Migrant Workmen Act,1979 and there is a Supreme Court judgement
delivered in July, 1990 in a writ petition involving migrant workers to the
effect that "every State/Union Territory in India shall be obliged to permit
officers of the originating State of the migrant labour for holding proper
inquiries within the limits of the recipient States for enforcement of the
Act and no recipient State shall place any embargo or hindrance in such
process", the same has not been implemented. Has any newspaper raised this
issue? How does UID play any role in this?

Citing migrant workers to justify UID appears to be an exercise in
sophistry. The National Commission on Rural Labour, which submitted its
report in 1991, studied the problem of inter-State migrant workmen in depth.
This commission recommended third parties to file complaints to protect
workers, ensure the liability of contractors and principal employers,
setting up of Special Courts and changing the migration policy to reduce
exploitation. Has any financial newspaper in particular deputed its
reporters and editors to pursue it?.

The most vulnerable and exploited migrant workers of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,
Jharkhand and Orissa who work in Alang, Bhavnagar, Gujarat in a Guatanamo
bay like condition akin to slaves with no rights. Their rights needs to be
protected my genuine measures and not by fake initiatives like UID scheme.
When The Financial Express took an editorial position to market Nandan
Nilekani's Image of India and his conception of identity of Indian citizens,
the Managing Editor looked like a writer of a paid feature (advertorial). It
does not engage with the issues raised by the majority of Indians who are as
skeptical of UID as most political parties are of Electronic Voting Machines
(EVM)which has been declared unconstitutional in Germany, scrapped in
Ireland and many other countries. Notably, "Security Analysis of India's
Electronic Voting Machines <http://indiaevm.org/evm_tr2010-jul29.pdf>", a
research paper to be presented in October, 2010 at the ACM Computer and
Communications Security conference led to the arrest of Hari Prasad, the
co-author of the paper although some 16 political parties representing
almost half of the Indian parliament have expressed serious concerns about
the use of electronic voting amidst intriguing silence by those who support
UID project. It appears that somehow the mindset that promotes unquestioned
use of EVM with a touching faith in likes of Nilekani is the same mindset
that promotes UID project with astounding concerns for those Below Poverty
Line and the migrant workers.

You quote Isaiah Berlin, a British philosopher and his concept of liberty
implicitly underlining that UID does entail the issue of civil liberties.
Did this newspaper ever take a position for migrant workers who face
apartheid by local state governments and callousness from central
government? The editor of this financial paper has failed examine why UK has
abandoned a similar UID project because of massive and unprecedented
people's opposition. Had Isaiah Berlin been alive (he died in 1997)he would
have supported his fellow British citizens in rejecting the party and the
government that "oversold the advantages of identity cards" like Nilekani
and his acolytes are doing. In UK, during the 2010 General Election
campaign, the published manifestos of the various parties revealed that the
Labour Party planned to continue the introduction of the identity card
scheme, while all other parties pledged to discontinue plans to issue ID
cards. The Conservative party also explicitly pledged to scrap the National
Identity Register.

In the Conservative Party – Liberal Democrat Party Coalition Agreement that
followed the 2010 General Election, the new UK government announced that
they planned to scrap the ID card scheme, including the National Identity
Register (akin to our National Population Register) as part of their
measures 'to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties under the
Labour Government and roll back state intrusion.'

In May 2010, the new UK government announced that the scrapping of the
identity card scheme which would save approximately £86 million over the
following 4 years, and avoid a further £800 million in maintenance costs
over the decade which were to have been recovered through fees. Indian
government will also save millions like UK did by scrapping Nilekani's idea
and accepting the opinion of majority of Indians who reject Nilekani's
allergy with citizens being sovereigns because it comes in the way of a
toxic notion of industrial development. Isaiah Berlin had rightly said, "All
forms of tampering with human beings, getting at them, shaping them against
their will to your own pattern, all thought control and conditioning is,
therefore, a denial of that in men which makes them men and their values
ultimate." UID project denies those non-negotiable values and is being
marketed like a commercial commodity.


thanks
Gopal Krishna
New Delhi
Mb: 9818089660
Skype id: witnesskrishna
E-mail: [email protected]
Blog: toxicswatch.blogspot.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to