Aadhaar deadline extended till December 31: Centre tells SC

Agencies
August 30, 2017

New Delhi, Aug 30: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will resume hearing the Aadhaar case in the first week of November, after Attorney General K K Venugopal informed the apex court that the Centre will extend the deadline to furnish Aadhaar details to avail benefits of various social welfare schemes till December 31.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said there was no urgency to hear the matter after the AG told the bench that the Centre will extend the September 30th deadline.

Senior advocate Shyam Divan, representing various petitioners, mentioned the matter before the bench, also comprising Justices Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, and sought early hearing on the batch of petitions which have also challenged the Centre’s move to make Aadhaar mandatory for availing benefits of of various social welfare schemes.

When Divan referred to the deadline of September 30, Venugopal said, “We (Centre) will extend it to December 31”. “The urgency is not there. It will be listed in the first week of November,” the bench said.

The court has been hearing a clutch of petitions challenging the validity of the 12-digit biometric identification system since 2015. On August 24, a nine-judge constitution bench ruled that privacy is a fundamental right, subject to reasonable restrictions.

“The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution,” the bench observed.

The five-judge constitution bench hearing the Aadhaar-related matters had referred the privacy matter to a larger bench. The nine-judge bench ruling is likely to have an impact on the Aadhaar case as it runs against the government’s stand that privacy is a fundamental right, but a wholly qualified one.

The government has, however, welcomed the court verdict and claimed it had always supported the view that privacy is a fundamental right.

Former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, however, expressed surprise over the government’s reaction. He told The Indian Express that “the government should not have diluted their stand in court”.

He added that had he still been in office as Attorney General, he would have admitted that the government had lost the case.

Comments

George
 - 
Wednesday, 30 Aug 2017

SC didnt make aadhar mandatory?

Hari
 - 
Wednesday, 30 Aug 2017

Aadhar is not at all safe. First and foremost it given to private firm. How can we trust a private firm

Kumar
 - 
Wednesday, 30 Aug 2017

Still thousands of people are there without aadhar and they are protesting against it.

Ganesh
 - 
Wednesday, 30 Aug 2017

Actually aadhar is not necessary. But they need to loot in that. govt gave contract to private MNC. Thats why govt threatening by linking and givng deadline and then by changing the deadline

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
March 14,2020

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 31,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 31: BJP leader CP Yogeshwar has slammed Yediyurappa supporters and said the JDS leader HD Kumaraswamy is supporting BJP.

Speaking to the reporters, Yogeshwar said, "Congress president DK Shivakumar and Janata Dal (Secular) leader and former CM HD Kumaraswamy, both are Yediyurappa supporters."

"His words seem to support the BJP. All that Kumaraswamy had said, during our government's rule, are happening including the officers they mentioned are being transferred. He has come forward to support BJP from the back door," Yogeshwar.

While reacting to allegations made by CP Yogeshwar, Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee president DK Shivakumar has said that earlier Yogeshwar requested for State Legislative Council (MLC) member ticket and now such people are blaming me without any evidence. This shows his dishonesty to his party and the kind of person he is." 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 9,2020

Mangaluru, Feb 9: A youth, native of Dakshina Kannada, was kidnapped and later robbed and then abandoned by a group of criminals, after he landed at the Karipur International Airport in Kerala early on Sunday morning.

In a complaint filed with the Kondotty police, the victim identified as Abdul Nazar Shamsad, said he was kidnapped while he was travelling in a shared auto from the airport to Calicut town. The kidnappers took him to an unknown destination where they tortured him.

Shamshad was reportedly subjected to physical assault and was asked to hand over the gold that he carried with him. It is learnt that the kidnappers had mistaken the youth for a gold smuggler and tortured him in order to get hold of the smuggled gold. They also stole his money and documents before abandoning him.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.