Statement of concern on enrollment shivir for biometric Unique
Identification (UID)/Aadhaar number

Press Council of India (PCI)’s Norms of Journalistic Conduct refers to
Press “As a custodian of public interest”. The enrollment shivir of
Delhi Journalists Association (DJA) and Indraprastha Press Club of
India with support from Indian Medical Association (IMA) for biometric
Unique Identification (UID)/Aadhaar number is unethical, illegitimate
and illegal. It is against the public interest. The enrollment planned
for August 4-5, 2013 for journalists appears to be a partial act.

How will they undertake impartial reporting on the controversial issue
of violation of human rights by biometric technologies when they have
submitted themselves before it?.

In fact media organisations and unions should desist from submitting
themselves to biometric attendance in their respective organisations
and examine the legality of such arrangements.

DJA, NUJ and IMA should scrutinize the legality of UID/aadhaar number
by attempting to seek answer to questions like:

what is the UID/Aadhaar?

A card?

A number?

Or both?

Is the UID project about identity or identification?

Is it about control and tracking or transparency?

Is it about information or data?

Is it a unique identity (UID) or a “Know Your Customer” (KYC)?

Is the UID voluntary or mandatory?

Is the information collected kept on a government database or with
private companies?

Is the UIDAI part of the state, or an entity that transits through the
Planning Commission to become a private company when it reaches
“steady state”?

Is the UIDAI a back office for the National Population Register (NPR),
or is it a competitor in the race to enrol?

Is the UID part of a surveillance apparatus, or is it only to deliver
entitlements?

Is biometrics unimpeachable or this an experiment?

Is it a game changer or an app?

Why have countries like UK, Australia, China, France etc rejected
similar biometric identification based exercises?

What did Wikileaks reveal about Pakistani citizens biometric database,
Egyptian citizens database and UID?

Has the Greek citizens database which was stolen been recovered?

Isn’t UIDAI planning to become a NIU (National Information Utility, a
private company with a public purpose with profit making as the motive
but not profit maximizing)?

Media persons basic tool is language. They can easily see through the
linguistic corruption being attempted to take them royally for a ride
if they apply their mind rigorous.

Informed media persons will surely boycott such illegitimate and
bullying initiatives of the government which is linked to National
Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) and National Counter Terrorism Centre
(NCTC) which faces opposition from most political parties. Such
initiatives are a threat to privacy, civil liberties, federalism,
national security, sovereignty and constitution becasue it facilitates
emergence of a database based surveillance State. It is indeed quite
bizarre that DJA was ignorant of the report of multiparty
Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) on Finance submitted to the
Parliament in December 2011 which questioned the power of the
government to collect bio-metric data and dismissed the Bill to make
UIDAI legal with retrospective effect.

DJA and its parent organisation NUJ can rectify their big mistake by
issuing a statement of clarification and regret after examining the
official, parliamentary and legal basis of biometric identification
being undertaken by Planning Commission’s Unique Identification
Authority of India (UIDAI) and Union Ministry of Home Affairs under
the influence of World Bank Group and its partner foreign companies
like Gemalto, IBM, L-1 Identity Solutions of Safran Group, Microsoft
and Pfizer. If by mistake some media persons or their near ones get
enrolled they should refrain from using it.

DJA, NUJ and their supporting organisation IMA should examine the
history text books and understand how biometric identification was
used by the Nazi regime in Germany for profiling the jews and causing
holocaust. These media organisations have committed a blunder by
getting themselves trapped in this anti-people profiling business
because of its being anti-poor, anti-minorities and undemocratic. If
they can show the moral courage to take remedial steps with immediate
effect they will help set a healthy precedent in public interest.

Arun Kumar
Member, Press Council of India
General Secretary, Bihar Working Journalists Union (BWJU)
Member, National Executive Committee, Indian Journalists Union (IJU),
President, The Times of India Newspaper Employees Union (TOINEU), Patna