“One of the fundamental contrasts between free democratic societies and totalitarian regimes is that the totalitarian governments rely on secrecy for the regime and disclosure for all other people, where as in the civic culture of liberal democracy, the position is approximately the reverse.”
- Geoffrey De Q Walker
The new national ID card scheme sought to be introduced by the Government marks a movement towards this totalitarian regime referred to above. Picture ‘Enemy of the State’ and at the least harmful level, “the government knowing where youa re and what you are doing at every point of time” and then ask yourself if its allright that this be the case?
Hopefully, the answer should be a ‘no’;else you are one of those sitting in the chairs attempting to be the very puppet the state wants you to be, and not paying any heed to rights and constitutional protections.
The greatest threat posed by this scheme is that to privacy and individual liberty as a whole. That an individual can exercise his option of free will within a certain space to himself without the state knowing what he or she is doing. This also being perhaps the greatest advantages of a civil democratic society. On the other hand is the dystopic vision of a Orwellian society with the state playing the role of a “Big Brother” and watching everybody’s move. In fact, the Indian Supreme Court has said in as early as in 1964 in Kharak Singh v. State of UP, that nothing is more deleterious to a man’s physical happiness and health than a calculated interference with his privacy.
While there may be some doubts as to the prevalence of this right under the Constitution, the movement on the other hand to legitimize other modes of surveillance and collection of evidence is also disheartening. We are one of the few democratic countries where illegally obtained evidence is still admissible and narco analysis and brain mapping practiced ‘circumstances galore’. All this is done under the garb of state security. That this is the solution for ending the search for terrorists, the problem of illegal immigrants, state enemies and the like. You sell this to the common man and Voila! You get them to sign up for a national ID card program/ scheme. Ofcourse, there are the benefits of easy distribution of ration, programmes for the poor etc… that come along; but they surely don’t mandate a card for every citizen.
It is not just an ID card, but there’s also an angle of biometrics involved. Thus, every citizen would have a number tag, his personal details and biometric descriptions like finger prints, DNA etc… attached. I couldn’t help amusing myself with this thought the moment I saw the IDEA advertisement on the issue. The one where everybody is referred to by their phone numbers and the new government policy is highlighted in the background.
Sadly unlike the United States and the European Union, the law on privacy in India has one limitation as observed by the Court in PUCL v. Union of India,
“The Right to Privacy is subservient to the interests of the state.”
That’s how easy it is to introduce and prepare a defense around the national ID card scheme. And that’s why it would succeed and my/our concerns wouldn’t be addressed. But if there is any semblance and place for rights being used as trumps against Government power, that rights can simply not be stashed away merely because a certain section would be better off it they were; then there is some hope.
It must be remembered that what is at stake is nothing less that the nature of our society and the power and authority of the state over the individual; something that we cannot afford to lose in a democracy.
Perhaps the only politician who is so vocal about the constitution during the times of elections has been Mayawati and we must give the devil her due for that. She also has raised some serious questions that Vinay brings forth but doesn’t go further into. For instance, would we have specific provisions for the minorities if there hadn’t been a
The 


