Usha Ramanathan works on the jurisprudence of law, poverty and rights. She writes and speaks on issues that include the nature of law, the Bhopal Gas Disaster, mass displacement, eminent domain, civil liberties including the death penalty, beggary, criminal law, custodial institutions, the environment, and the judicial process. She has been tracking and engaging with the UID project and has written and debated extensively on the subject. In July-September 2013, she wrote a 19-part series on the UID project that was published in The Statesman, a national daily.

Her work draws heavily upon non-governmental experience in its encounters with the state; a 6 year stint with a law journal (Supreme Court Cases) as reporter from the Supreme Court; and engagement with matters of law and public policy.

She was a member of: the Expert Group on Privacy set up by the Planning Commission of India which gave in its report in October 2012; a committee (2013-14) set up in the Department of Biotechnology to review the Draft Human DNA Profiling Bill 2012; and the Committee set up by the Prime Minister's Office (2013-14) to study the socio-economic status of tribal communities which gave its report to the government in 2014.

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

60 - ‘UIDAI, an experiment on entire population’ - Hindu


‘UIDAI, an experiment on entire population’


STAFF REPORTER

       Usha Ramanathan— Photo: V. Sreenivasa Murthy

A fortnight after the Supreme Court passed an interim order stating that Aadhaar could not be made mandatory for providing subsidies or for getting government scheme benefits, Usha Ramanathan, an independent law researcher, here on Monday spoke about the uncertainty about the future of the project of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).

Delivering a talk on the Aadhaar project and its implications in the context of the directive of the Supreme Court, she said that even as the hearing of the three oil PSUs who moved to the Supreme Court seeking modification of its earlier order is due on Tuesday, there was a need for people to raise their voice and question the process as it infringes on issues pertaining to privacy.

Stating that the UIDAI was an “experiment” on the entire population of the country. Making a dig at how the data was collected for the homeless, she said that there was a need to produce multiple identities in order to get an identity. Citing an example of a homeless person whose address for the card was that of an NGO, she said that it would create confusion at a later stage. “The system does not have an understanding of how the poor live,” she added. She said that the State should ensure that it does not infringe on the privacy of the citizens as UIDAI data can be conveniently used by the marketing industry.


Posted by at
Labels: