Business Insider India has updated its Privacy and Cookie policy. We use cookies to ensure that we give you the better experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we\'ll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Business Insider India website. However, you can change your cookie setting at any time by clicking on our Cookie Policy at any time. You can also see our Privacy Policy.
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has scrapped its plan to monitor and track citizens on social media — and has no plans of doing so in the future.
A tender floated by UIDAI in July 2018 invited social media agencies to employ a ‘social listening tool’ to monitor and address ‘negative sentiments’.
The proposal undermined Aadhar’s sole purpose of accommodating social welfare has been accused of violating the fundamental rights to privacy, freedom of speech, liberty and equality.
The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), which manages the biometric identities of more than a billion Indians, is going back on its plan to monitor social media — for good.
The Attorney General told the Supreme Court that UIDAI is withdrawing its tender and won’t be floating anything along the same lines in the future, according to Bar&Bench. The tender, issued in July 2018, invited companies to help the apex agency employ a ‘social listening tool’ to track and monitor online conversations relating to Aadhaar.
It was floated as UIDAI looking for a social media agency to manage its online platforms. The tender was then accused of violating the constitutional rights to privacy, equality, personal liberty and the freedom of speech.
Here are all the reasons why it was a good call for UIDAI backtrack on its plan:
The sole purpose of Aadhaar identification is limited to executing social welfare measures as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in September 2018. People availing these subsidies are unlikely to be present on social media, according to Trinamool Congress member Mahua Moitra who challenged UIDAI’s tender in the Supreme Court.
It is one of the reasons why Aadhaar is no longer mandatory for setting up bank accounts or getting a new phone number — its constitutional validity is limited to pro-poor and inclusionary schemes.
According to Moitra, the tender was “an attempt by the State to overreach the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court in a matter where the legality of social media surveillance and Aadhaar itself in under challenge and this Court is seized of these issues.”
Violating freedom of speech
(Source: BCCL)
UIDAI’s aim was to conduct a ‘sentiment analysis’ and ‘flag any discrepancy in sentiments’ trend’. In addition to spotting these attitudes, the companies would also then have to come up with ways to address and ‘neutralise negative sentiments’.
Even though UIDAI stated that they wouldn’t be monitoring private conversations, only what has been publicly posted — the agency’s proposed social listening tool still violates an individual’s freedom of speech.
“The right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek and receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers,” according to the Indian Constitution.
The Supreme Court has also widened the definition to mention that the government has no monopoly on electronic media.
Setting the stage for mass surveillance
Members from Right to Food Campaign Network hold campaign 'Beware of Aadhaar' (Source: BCCL)
UIDAI’s tender outlined that whichever agency got selected, would also have to segregate the collected data into ‘problematic and non-problematic’ conversations in order to find instances which negatively impact the Aadhaar brand.
The accumulation of all this material would then be submitted to the agency on a weekly basis as a part of ‘online reputation management reports’.
In China, similar mass surveillance techniques are used for ‘social supervision’ — including tracking message on WeChat, the country’s most popular messaging service akin to WhatsApp.
Even though there are over 750 million internet users in China, their online and digital communication is strictly regulated. Where WhatsApp promises encryption, WeChat conversations are saved on servers for up to 6 months. Even if a user deletes a particular chat, it can be retrieved by Tencent — the app’s publisher — at any time, especially if the government suspects illegal activity.
Violating the right to equality
Cross section of citizens from Bengaluru holding a protest demonstration against Aadhaar in front of Town Hall (Source: BCCL)
Categorising conversations as ‘problematic and non-problematic’ also violates the Constitutional right to equality. Nobody gets special privileges, but nobody gets discriminated against either because they happen to hold a different point of view — or ‘negative sentiment’.
The government is already in the cross-hairs for the newly amended Citizenship Act, which has been accused of discriminating against the population on the basis of religion — leaving a large proportion of the Muslim migrants without the right to apply for citizenship.
According to Article 21 of the Indian constitution, the right to life includes the right to social security. It dictates that one group of individuals cannot target or threaten the liberty of another.
It also includes the right to know or to be informed. The people are entitled to be privy to the affairs of the State and how they are being conducted.