NEWSLETTER

Sign up to read weekly email newsletter

13 years 🄳 of Publication, 100k+ Stories, 30+ Countries

Legal Desire Media and Insights
Donate
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Reading: Not Possible To Use Aadhaar For Surveillance, UIDAI Tells Supreme Court
Share
Aa
Legal Desire Media and InsightsLegal Desire Media and Insights
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Search
  • Law Firm & In-house Updates
  • Deals
  • Interviews
  • Insight
  • Read to know
  • Courses
Follow US
Legal Desire Media & Insights
Home Ā» Blog Ā» Not Possible To Use Aadhaar For Surveillance, UIDAI Tells Supreme Court
News

Not Possible To Use Aadhaar For Surveillance, UIDAI Tells Supreme Court

By Ankita Srivastava 3 Min Read
Share

Even as the Supreme Court continues to hear arguments over whether right to privacy is a fundamental right — in relation to citizens sharing there biometrics to get Aadhaar — the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has told the Supreme Court that there was no such thing as privacy in the internet era, and Aadhaar could not be used to track citizens.

NDTV reported the UIDAI as saying that the safeguards built into laws and systems ensured that it would be impossible to use Aadhaar for surveillance.

The report quoted Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta as telling the court, “Nothing is private in the online era.”

A nine-judge Constitutional bench has been arguments over the right to privacy for the past few weeks. In the process the apex court is also examining whether two previous judgements in 1954 and 1962, that had held that right to privacy was not fundamental,were correct or not.

While several petitioners including Karnataka High Court judge Justice K.S. Puttaswamy and Magsaysay Award winner Shanta Sinha and researcher Kalyani Sen have challenged the validity of the Aadhaar scheme in the Supreme Court, the government has maintained that Aadhaar could not be used a tool for surveillance.

The government has also in the past said that every citizen of the country did not haveĀ Ā absolute right to their bodies, arguing against petitioners who have questioned the usage and safety of biometric data being given to the government for Aadhaar.

Last week, as part of the hearing against the right to privacy, the government deemed it as not a fundamental right.

Attorney General K.K. Venugopal had said, “There is a fundamental right to privacy, but it is a wholly qualified right since the right to privacy consists of various aspects and is a sub-species of the right to liberty, every aspect of it will not qualify as a fundamental right.”

“There is no fundamental right to privacy and even if it is assumed as a fundamental right, it is multifaceted. Every facet can’t be ipso facto considered a fundamental right,” Venugopal had said.

He had said, “informational privacy” could not be a right to privacy and it could not ever be a fundamental right.

However, appearing for the non-BJP led states of Karnataka, West Bengal, Punjab and Puducherry Kapil Sibal had said that these states held the right to privacy as a fundamental right.

You Might Also Like

Herbert Smith Freehills and Kramer Levin Finalize Merger, Creating $2B Global Law Firm

Reddit Sues Anthropic Over AI Data Use

BCI Rules for Foreign Law Firms in India, Register your Law Firm in India

Amber Heard Loses Appeal in Insurance Battle Linked to Johnny Depp Defamation Case

October 2024 Depo Provera Lawsuit Update

Subscribe

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.

Don’t miss out on new posts, Subscribe to newsletter Get our latest posts and announcements in your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Ankita Srivastava August 3, 2017
Share this Article
Facebook Twitter Email Copy Link Print
Leave a comment Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Herbert Smith Freehills and Kramer Levin Finalize Merger, Creating $2B Global Law Firm

June 2, 2025 – Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) and Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel have completed their transatlantic merger, formingĀ Herbert…

News
June 5, 2025

Reddit Sues Anthropic Over AI Data Use

Reddit has filed a lawsuit against Anthropic, an AI startup, alleging unauthorised scraping of its user-generated content to train Anthropic's…

News
June 5, 2025

BCI Rules for Foreign Law Firms in India, Register your Law Firm in India

In May 2025, the Bar Council of India (BCI) officially notified new rules (via the Gazette dated 14 May 2025)…

Law Firm & In-house UpdatesNews
May 24, 2025

Amber Heard Loses Appeal in Insurance Battle Linked to Johnny Depp Defamation Case

Amber Heard's legal woes continue as the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected her appeal against New…

NewsRead to Know
November 30, 2024

For over 10 years, Legal Desire provides credible legal industry updates and insights across the globe.

  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Legal Marketing Service for Law Firms and Lawyers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Condition
  • Cancellation/Refund Policy

Follow US:Ā 

Legal Desire Media & Insights

For Submissions/feedbacks/sponsorships/advertisement/syndication: office@legaldesire.com

Legal Desire Media & Insights 2023

✖
Cleantalk Pixel

Removed from reading list

Undo
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?