Community hub
Community hub
Recent from talks
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Aadhaar Act, 2016
The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, benefits and services) Act, 2016 is a money bill of the Parliament of India. It aims to provide legal backing to the Aadhaar unique identification number project. It was passed on 11 March 2016 by the Lok Sabha. Certain provisions of the Act came into force from 12 July 2016 and published in the Gazette of India on 12 September 2016.
During the budget presentation on 29 February 2016, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley announced that a bill will be introduced within a week which will provide legislative support to the Aadhaar. On 3 March 2016, the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016 was introduced in the Parliament as a money bill by Jaitley as it fulfilled Article 110's provisos - 110(1)(c), 110(1)(d) and 110(1)(e) of the Constitution of India. The decision to introduce it as a money bill was criticised by the opposition parties. Ghulam Nabi Azad, an INC leader, wrote in a letter to Jaitley that the ruling party BJP was trying to bypass the Rajya Sabha, as they did not have the majority in the upper house. A money bill is only required to pass in the lower house Lok Sabha. Jyotiraditya Scindia of INC asked why a new bill was introduced when the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 was still pending in the Rajya Sabha.
The bill was passed on 11 March 2016 by the Lok Sabha by a voice vote after a brief debate. Tathagata Satpathy of Biju Janata Dal (BJD) had raised concerns that the project could be used for mass surveillance or ethnic cleansing in the future. He also raised questions about why a new identity card project was created despite having several identity card systems. He also questioned why the bill was introduced as a money bill. He also said that although the bill allows the sharing of biometric under the circumstances of national security, no concrete definition of national security was included.
Bhartruhari Mahtab of BJD requested that the bill should not be rushed and referred to a parliamentary panel. Mallikarjun Kharge of INC said that they supported the bill but wanted some suggestions to be discussed. Rajeev Satav of INC reminded the house that initially the ruling-party BJP had opposed the Aadhaar during the reign of United Progressive Alliance (UPA), before turning around and supporting it. During the debate, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley assured the house that the Aadhaar project will not be misused. Jaitley stated that 97% of the adult and 67% of children had already been registered under the project. He also said that the definition of national security is up to the courts to define.
On 15 March 2016, Shumsher K. Sheriff, Secretary of the Rajya Sabha, formally notified the house that the bill has been passed in the Lok Sabha. During the debate spanning over two days, Naresh Agrawal of Samajwadi Party (SP) said that the bill doesn't fit into the definition of a money bill. P. J. Kurien, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, said that it was the decision of Lok Sabha Chairperson Sumitra Mahajan to allow the bill, so it should not be questioned. Sitaram Yechury of Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) argued that the bill was unconstitutional as the Constitution guarantees the freedom of life and liberty and privacy comes under it. Jaitley responded to Yechury by saying that privacy is not an absolute right and it can be restricted by the law. Jairam Ramesh of INC said Aadhaar should be limited to subsidies only and not made mandatory for any purpose.
On 16 March 2016, the bill was returned to the Lok Sabha by the Rajya Sabha with some suggested amendments. The Lok Sabha was free to accept or reject the amendments. But, Lok Sabha rejected the amendments and passed the bill.
Most of the provisions of the Bill have been borrowed from the previous National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010. The major difference is that the three-member committee called the Identity Review Committee of the previous bill was removed in the new bill. Also, the section 8 of Aadhaar Act is significantly different from that of NIAI bill, 2010. While the NIAI bill allowed the authentication limited to the biometric match only with Yes/No option, the Aadhaar Act allows the requesting agency/person to ask for other information too, pertaining to the person's identity.
The Clause 2 (g) defines "biometric information" as photograph, finger print, iris scan, or "other such biological attributes" of an individual. The Clause 2 (k) defines "demographic information" as name, date of birth, address and "other relevant information" of an individual. It explicitly excludes race, religion, caste, tribe, ethnicity, language, records of entitlement, income or medical history. The Clause 2 (v) defines "resident" as an individual who has resided in India for a period or periods amounting in all to 182 days or more in the 12 months immediately preceding the date of application for enrolment.
Hub AI
Aadhaar Act, 2016 AI simulator
(@Aadhaar Act, 2016_simulator)
Aadhaar Act, 2016
The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, benefits and services) Act, 2016 is a money bill of the Parliament of India. It aims to provide legal backing to the Aadhaar unique identification number project. It was passed on 11 March 2016 by the Lok Sabha. Certain provisions of the Act came into force from 12 July 2016 and published in the Gazette of India on 12 September 2016.
During the budget presentation on 29 February 2016, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley announced that a bill will be introduced within a week which will provide legislative support to the Aadhaar. On 3 March 2016, the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Bill, 2016 was introduced in the Parliament as a money bill by Jaitley as it fulfilled Article 110's provisos - 110(1)(c), 110(1)(d) and 110(1)(e) of the Constitution of India. The decision to introduce it as a money bill was criticised by the opposition parties. Ghulam Nabi Azad, an INC leader, wrote in a letter to Jaitley that the ruling party BJP was trying to bypass the Rajya Sabha, as they did not have the majority in the upper house. A money bill is only required to pass in the lower house Lok Sabha. Jyotiraditya Scindia of INC asked why a new bill was introduced when the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 was still pending in the Rajya Sabha.
The bill was passed on 11 March 2016 by the Lok Sabha by a voice vote after a brief debate. Tathagata Satpathy of Biju Janata Dal (BJD) had raised concerns that the project could be used for mass surveillance or ethnic cleansing in the future. He also raised questions about why a new identity card project was created despite having several identity card systems. He also questioned why the bill was introduced as a money bill. He also said that although the bill allows the sharing of biometric under the circumstances of national security, no concrete definition of national security was included.
Bhartruhari Mahtab of BJD requested that the bill should not be rushed and referred to a parliamentary panel. Mallikarjun Kharge of INC said that they supported the bill but wanted some suggestions to be discussed. Rajeev Satav of INC reminded the house that initially the ruling-party BJP had opposed the Aadhaar during the reign of United Progressive Alliance (UPA), before turning around and supporting it. During the debate, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley assured the house that the Aadhaar project will not be misused. Jaitley stated that 97% of the adult and 67% of children had already been registered under the project. He also said that the definition of national security is up to the courts to define.
On 15 March 2016, Shumsher K. Sheriff, Secretary of the Rajya Sabha, formally notified the house that the bill has been passed in the Lok Sabha. During the debate spanning over two days, Naresh Agrawal of Samajwadi Party (SP) said that the bill doesn't fit into the definition of a money bill. P. J. Kurien, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, said that it was the decision of Lok Sabha Chairperson Sumitra Mahajan to allow the bill, so it should not be questioned. Sitaram Yechury of Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) argued that the bill was unconstitutional as the Constitution guarantees the freedom of life and liberty and privacy comes under it. Jaitley responded to Yechury by saying that privacy is not an absolute right and it can be restricted by the law. Jairam Ramesh of INC said Aadhaar should be limited to subsidies only and not made mandatory for any purpose.
On 16 March 2016, the bill was returned to the Lok Sabha by the Rajya Sabha with some suggested amendments. The Lok Sabha was free to accept or reject the amendments. But, Lok Sabha rejected the amendments and passed the bill.
Most of the provisions of the Bill have been borrowed from the previous National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010. The major difference is that the three-member committee called the Identity Review Committee of the previous bill was removed in the new bill. Also, the section 8 of Aadhaar Act is significantly different from that of NIAI bill, 2010. While the NIAI bill allowed the authentication limited to the biometric match only with Yes/No option, the Aadhaar Act allows the requesting agency/person to ask for other information too, pertaining to the person's identity.
The Clause 2 (g) defines "biometric information" as photograph, finger print, iris scan, or "other such biological attributes" of an individual. The Clause 2 (k) defines "demographic information" as name, date of birth, address and "other relevant information" of an individual. It explicitly excludes race, religion, caste, tribe, ethnicity, language, records of entitlement, income or medical history. The Clause 2 (v) defines "resident" as an individual who has resided in India for a period or periods amounting in all to 182 days or more in the 12 months immediately preceding the date of application for enrolment.