[Two quotes from 'Supreme Test' by Pratap Bhanu Mehta: I. "(I)t is an Orwellian conception of constitutional justice when petitioners cannot make arguments because ostensibly, those arguments are being heard, except there are no hearings."
II. "(T)he delay in sorting out matters relating to Aadhaar has given the executive carte blanche to go ahead and change the facts on the ground to the point where we might be just handed a fait accompli." (Source: <http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-test-4642608/>.) And, just another one: "(T)he (supreme) court has created a credibility crisis for itself. Its mendacious evasions on the issue of privacy rights emanating from Aadhaar have eroded its credibility. In a context where the Supreme Court has found time to take over entire private bodies like the BCCI and run them, the idea that it did not have time to conduct hearings [in fact, even forming the bench] since October 2015 on an issue of such vital importance is frankly scandalous."] I/II. Gautam Bhatia @gautambhatia88 Gautam Bhatia Retweeted Prasanna S Meanwhile, the SC declines to hear pleas against making Aadhaar mandatory for Bhopal gas victims etc.Gautam Bhatia added, Prasanna S @prasanna_s Justice Sikri order: Tag along with earlier petitions. (Cites 11.08.15 and 15.10.15 orders). Liberty to mention before CJI [Chief Justice of India] for CB [Constitution Bench]. II. ["No democratic country in the world has devised a system similar to Aadhaar which operates like an electronic leash to tether every citizen from cradle to grave. There can be no question of free consent in situations where an individual is coerced to part with its biometric information (a) to be eligible for welfare schemes and or (b) under the threat of penal consequences."] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-sc-to-hear-new-plea-on-aadhaar-today-2431650 SC to hear new plea on Aadhaar today RITIKA JAIN <http://www.dnaindia.com/authors/ritika-jain> | Tue, 9 May 2017-07:10am , New Delhi , DNAIn the petition, Shanta Sinha and one Kalyani Sen Menon have contended that the Act violates their fundamental right to self-determination among others. The din against mandatory use of Aadhaar will increase in the coming days with yet another petition in the Supreme Court, challenging the provisions of the Act in its current avtar. The top court on Tuesday will hear a new petition, drawn by advocates Udayaditya Banerjee and Samiksha Godiyal, challenging the Aadhaar Act and the notifications issued under section 7, days after it reserved its order on a batch of petitions challenging certain provisions of the Act and the compulsory enrolment for Aadhaar under the Finance Act. In the petition, Shanta Sinha and one Kalyani Sen Menon have contended that the Act violates their fundamental right to self-determination among others. "There are certain things the government simply cannot do because it fundamentally alters the relationship between the citizen and the state. The wholesale collection of biometric data including finger prints and storing it at a central depository per se puts the state in an extremely dominant position in relation to the individual citizen," the petition read. The petitioners have stated that the Centre, by issuing notification through its various ministries and making enrollment for Aadhaar compulsory, has flouted various interim orders passed by a three-judge bench and concurred upon by a constitution bench which asserts that Aadhaar is voluntary. "Further the State cannot put itself in a position where it can track an individual and engage in surveillance…the notion of limited government would mean that every individual citizen and citizenry collectively are entitled to live work and enjoy their varied lives without being under the continuous gaze of the State," focusing on the right to self-determination and an individual's right to privacy. The petitioners have also contended that the Centre has resorted to coercive measures in an attempt to compel the citizens to enroll for Aadhaar, a clear contradiction of the provisions of the Act. Besides, the petitioners have contended that the impugned Act coerces an individual to part with their personal information. ***"No democratic country in the world has devised a system similar to Aadhaar which operates like an electronic leash to tether every citizen from cradle to grave. There can be no question of free consent in situations where an individual is coerced to part with its biometric information (a) to be eligible for welfare schemes and or (b) under the threat of penal consequences."*** [Emphasis added.] The petitioners have thus prayed for several measures of relief which will be argued upon before the same bench that has already heard a matter pertaining to a similar batch of petitions. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, who concluded his fiery argument against the Aadhaar Act, is expected to lead the charge for this petition as well. Representing a batch of petitioners Senior Advocate Arvind Datar had submitted that unless the court intervened, if the government invalidated the Permanent Account Number (PAN) card if it was not linked to the Aadhar card — one of the provisions of the Finance Act, then an individual would be crippled. While Datar restricted his arguments on the merits of the law, Divan took the opportunity to highlight how dangerous it would be to allow private entities — who have been contracted by the government to make Aadhar cards, access to your most important and personal details of your life. "We gave birth to a state. We are sovereign. [Is the state] by an electronic leash, going to walk us around like a dog for the rest of our life?," he submitted. "No where in the world, electronic tagging to this extent is taking place. The last time citizens were numbered it was in [Nazi] concentration camps," Divan had said. *& ANALYSIS* While in earlier petitions only certain sections of the Finance Act were challenged, the new petition challenges the Aadhaar Act itself. The petitioners contend that the Centre has resorted to coercive measures in an attempt to compel the citizens to enroll for Aadhaar, a clear contradiction of the provisions of the Act. The Centre, however, had earlier itself submitted that the Aadhaar Act was not voluntary as it has been perceived and that the citizen has no absolute right over his body. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
