“ Aadhaar is a potentially useful instrument for delivering benefits and reducing fraud. But even its staunchest defenders should worry about the crude instrumentalism that has surrounded the passage of the Aadhaar bill.
Essentially, a small group of bureaucrats can render your privacy irrelevant. Privacy may not be absolute, as the finance minister says, but that is no reason to make bureaucratic power nearly absolute, as this bill does.
If lots of different agencies link their information to Aadhaar numbers, what will be the protocols governing the sharing of that information? What will be the norms governing data mining? Will we have agency-specific protocols on what information can be shared with whom and under what conditions? Essentially, a small group of bureaucrats can render your privacy irrelevant. Privacy may not be absolute, as the finance minister says, but that is no reason to make bureaucratic power nearly absolute, as this bill does.
Since we freely give in to Google and Facebook, what is wrong in giving in to the state? There are two responses. This argument may actually be a case for regulating big private companies more, rather than lowering protection standards in the state. But, most importantly, it elides an important distinction: The state can use coercive power in a way in which private entities cannot. Private entities are not inconsequential in the exercise of power, but that power operates differently. The reason we worry about the state is that it can coerce you, imprison you, deprive you of your rights. So the standards of accountability have to be correspondingly adjusted. “