Citizens' Forums Want UID Project Scrapped

Citizens’ Forums Want UID Project Scrapped is a Deccan Herald report published on 29 April 2010. The article documents concerns raised by civil society organisations regarding the Unique Identification project, focusing on transparency gaps, privacy risks, and the absence of feasibility assessments. It features statements from Thomas Matthew of Citizens’ Action Forum and Sunil Abraham, then Executive Director of the Centre for Internet and Society.

Article Details
Full Text
Context and Background
External Link

Article Details

📰 Published in:: Deccan Herald
📅 Date:: 29 April 2010
📄 Type:: News Report
📰 Newspaper Link:: Read Online

Full Text

Addressing the media persons on Wednesday, Thomas Matthew of Citizens' Action Forum said all the transactions undertaken by the UID project should be scrutinised under an accountable public body policy.

"The State government should make the financial and technological implications and costs incurred so far, including details of contracts awarded with respect to the UID project," he said.

One of the main concerns of the groups has been the lack of public discussion on the feasibility or desirability of the project.

"It was launched as an ID card for citizens, but was later changed to a number for all citizens. UID claims that there are several benefits of possessing a number, but passes on the responsibility to Registrars," Matthew said.

While UIDAI Chairperson Nandan Nilekani announced that the number was voluntary, the need to have such a number for obtaining any other form of service including bank accounts, would force a person to get an ID number, he added.

Executive Director of The Centre for Internet and Society, Sunil Abraham said even though the scheme is supposed to only provide verification of identity, there was no guarantee of safeguard against its misuse by potential third party users like telecom companies, banks and government departments.

"Though claims have been made of huge savings as the UID will stem leakages from welfare schemes, such as employment guarantee scheme, PDS and the LPG subsidy, but no feasibility studies have been conducted to assess the veracity of such a claim," Sunil said.

Context and Background

This report emerged during the initial rollout phase of India’s Unique Identification project, which had been established in 2009 under the chairmanship of Nandan Nilekani. The project, later known as Aadhaar, aimed to assign biometric-linked identification numbers to Indian residents.

Civil society groups raised multiple concerns during this period. Activists highlighted the lack of parliamentary scrutiny and public consultation before implementation. Questions centred on shifting project definitions—from identity cards to identification numbers—and the practical implications of making a supposedly voluntary system essential for accessing basic services.

Privacy advocates questioned the absence of data protection frameworks and safeguards against misuse by third-party entities. The argument that Aadhaar would reduce leakages in welfare schemes had not been backed by feasibility studies at this stage. Transparency demands included disclosure of financial commitments and contracts awarded under the programme.

A year later, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance identified serious gaps in the project, including unclear biometric data policies, security weaknesses, and involvement of private contractors without adequate oversight. These early objections reflected broader debates about balancing digital governance initiatives with civil liberties and accountability mechanisms.