Tag: narendar modi

‘Prime Minister Must Visit Manipur’: Rahul Gandhi Visits Relief Camps in Restive State

The Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha visited relief camps in Churachandpur, Moirang and Jiribam. He also met Manipur governor Anusuiya Uikey. Hours before Gandhi’s visit, firing was reported in Jiribam district in the early hours of Monday. 

New Delhi: Leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi visited Manipur on Monday (July 8), his first visit to the violence-torn northeastern state since the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and said that while he had hoped that the situation would have improved, it “is still nowhere near what it should be” and requested Prime Minister Narendra Modi to visit the violence-torn state.

The 14-month-long conflict in the state, which began on May 3 last year, has resulted in over 200 deaths and over 60,000 people being displaced and forced to live in relief camps. The divide between the Kukis and Meiteis has only widened over the past year.

Gandhi visited relief camps in Churachandpur, Moirang as well as in Jiribam. Later, Gandhi also met Manipur governor Anusuiya Uikey.

“It’s the third time I have come here since the problem started and it has been a tremendous tragedy. I was expecting some improvement in the situation but I was disappointed to see that the situation is still nowhere near what it should be,” he said while addressing reporters in Imphal.

Gandhi had earlier visited the state last year when violence first broke out, and then during the Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra in January this year.

“I visited the camps and heard the people there, heard their pain. I came here to listen to them, to build confidence in them and as somebody who is in the opposition, to try and apply pressure on the government so that it acts. Here, the need of the hour is peace. Violence is hurting everybody,” he said.

“Thousands of families have been harmed, properties have been destroyed, family members have been killed and I have never seen anywhere in India what is going on here. The state is completely split in two and it is a tragedy for everybody involved.”

The physical divide in the state hinges on ethnicity and has resulted in the state being virtually divided into two – between the Meiteis populated valley area and the Kuki-Zo populated hilly areas. Meiteis cannot go to the hilly areas, while the Kuki-Zo who live in the hills cannot go to the valley areas including the capital Imphal, which has better facilities, including government hospitals and the state’s only airport.

Gandhi said that Modi, who has not visited the state since the violence broke out, must visit to understand the ground reality.

“I feel that it is important that the prime minister come here, listen to the people of Manipur, try and understand what is going on. After all, Manipur is a proud state of the Indian union. Even if there was no tragedy, the Prime Minister should have come here. And in this huge tragedy, I request the Prime Minister to take one-two days to come here and try and listen to the people of Manipur. It will comfort the people of Manipur,” he said.

Hours before Gandhi’s visit, firing was reported in the Jiribam district in the early hours of Monday.

“Gunmen fired several rounds around 3:30 am towards the Meitei area of Gularthal, prompting security forces to retaliate. The exchange of fire continued till 7 am,” an official was quoted as saying to news agency Press Trust of India.

Manipur Congress president Keisham Meghachandra told the reporters that during his visit to Jiribam, Gandhi spoke to people in the relief camp.

“Rahul Gandhi visited the Jiribam district early in the morning today. And the people of this Jiribam district are very happy. Rahul Gandhi spoke with them and they shared their pain and also expressed many things like the sorrows of students and women,” he said.

Rahul Gandhi at a relief camp in Manipur on July 8, 2024. Photo: X (Twitter)/@INCIndia.

Meghachandra said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should visit Manipur in order to find a solution to the ongoing conflict, and while he had addressed the ongoing violence in the state in parliament last week, his statement that normalcy is returning to the violence-torn state is not true.

“Prime minister said in parliament that Manipur is returning to normalcy. But you see prior to Rahul Gandhi’s visit, today itself, close firing happened about 10km away from Jiribam headquarters. It is not that normalcy is returning that has been stated by the Prime Minister. So violence is still continuing. This visit is a peace mission. It shows that Rahul Gandhi loves the people of Manipur. In the last parliament session newly elected MPs of Manipur gave heated arguments. We demand that the Prime Minister should visit Manipur so that some solution can be found. His silence will not bring any solution to Manipur,” he said.

Also read: Rahul Gandhi and Manipur: the Politics Not of Transaction but of Love

Modi’s statement in the Rajya Sabha addressing the violence in Manipur came a day after he faced consistent sloganeering from the opposition in the Lok Sabha that chanted “Manipur, Manipur”. The day before in his maiden speech close to midnight in an almost empty Lok Sabha, Manipur MP Angomcha Bimol Akoijam tore into the ruling BJP and Modi for ignoring the “hurt, anger and sufferings”.

Gandhi on his visit to Manipur was accompanied by Congress general secretary (organisation) and MP K.C. Venugopal, Manipur’s state Congress leaders as well as newly elected MPs Angomcha Bimol Akoijam (Inner Manipur) and Alfred Kanngam Arthur (Outer Manipur).

A delegation of the Indigenous Tribal Leaders’ Forum (ITLF) submitted a memorandum to Gandhi.

“There has been no improvement in the security situation following over a year of killings and displacements; citizens continue to face daily danger of death,” the memorandum stated.

Highlighting the divide between the hill areas and the valley, which has affected connectivity and supply of essential goods and commodities, the memorandum called for an immediate political solution.

“An immediate political solution is required to break the cycle of violence and atrocities in Manipur..” it said.

In another memorandum submitted to Gandhi, the Kuki Students’ Organisation in Churachandpur district has urged for exam centres in the area so that students can take all-India competitive exams, and helicopter facilities from Lamka to Aizawl, Lamka to Kangpokpi, Lamka to Moreh to ease travel, among others. The Kuki Women’s Organisation for Human Rights in its memorandum has highlighted sexual violence being used as a “method or tactic of warfare” and that the shutdown of internet services in the state has prevented these abuses from becoming known.

Last year, Modi broke his silence on the ongoing violence in the northeastern state, 70 days after the violence began, only after a harrowing video went viral on social media the day before that showed two Kuki women being paraded naked in Kangpokpi on May 4.

PM Spoke of Respect for Women but Supports Rapists: Rahul Gandhi on Remission to Bilkis Convicts

Union parliamentary affairs minister Prahlad Joshi defended the move to grant approval to release the 11 convicted men, saying, “I don’t find anything wrong in it as it is done as a process of the law.”

New Delhi: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday targeted Prime Minister Narendra Modi over the remission granted to the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case of the 2002 Gujarat violence, alleging that while he spoke of “respect for women” from the Red Fort, in reality his government “supported” rapists.

His reaction came after the Gujarat government on Monday told the Supreme Court that it obtained “suitable orders” from the Union government to grant remission to the convicts in the case and dismissed the petitioners challenging the order as “interlopers” and “busybodies”.

“Talk of respect for women from the ramparts of the Red Fort but in reality support for ‘rapists’,” Gandhi said in a tweet in Hindi.

“The difference between the Prime Minister’s promises and intentions is clear, PM has only betrayed women,” he said.

Bilkis Bano was 21 years old and five months pregnant when she was gang-raped while fleeing from the 2002 violence in Gujarat. Her three-year-old daughter was among the seven family members killed.

The investigation in the case was handed over to the CBI and the trial was transferred to a Maharashtra court by the Supreme Court. A special CBI court in Mumbai had on January 21, 2008, sentenced the 11 men to life imprisonment on charges of gang-rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of seven members of her family.

Their conviction was later upheld by the Bombay high court and the Supreme Court.

The 11 men convicted in the case walked out free from the Godhra sub-jail on August 15 after the Gujarat government allowed their release under its remission policy.

Also Read: Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case Released With Union Govt’s Approval: Gujarat Govt

Stain will never wash off: Congress 

The Congress party also accused the Modi government of granting premature release to the convicts in the case for political motives and said “this stain on the legacy of this dispensation will never wash off”.

“It is repugnant, reprehensible and revolting that an elected government chose to release these convicts in such a cavalier manner. The grant of premature release to the convicts in the Bilkis Bano case is a stain on this government’s legacy that will never wash off,” he told reporters.

Singhvi said when the release was ordered on August 15, the Modi government maintained a studied and deliberate silence on freeing the criminals, an action which has drawn legitimate criticism the world over and “exposed our system to widespread shame and ridicule”.

“The fact that the Modi government actively suppressed this fact shows that even it was aware that the action was a condemnable one,” he noted.

“There are many compromises in politics. But the BJP has made the greatest compromise of all; a sacrifice of the last shred of conscience that separated them from those craven and venal elements who prize solely their own political survival over all else.”

“Why has the Modi Government, despite the objections of senior officials, sought to grant preferential treatment to individuals convicted of so reprehensible, horrific and heinous a crime?” the Congress leader asked

Singhvi also asked if such treatment will be granted to all individuals who are accused of heinous offences or if this was a limited-time offer contingent on the upcoming elections in Gujarat.

Also Read: SC to Hear on November 29 Pleas Challenging the Release of Convicts in Bilkis Bano Case

Union minister defends move

However, Union parliamentary affairs minister Prahlad Joshi on Tuesday defended his government granting approval to release the convicted men, saying, “I don’t find anything wrong in it as it is done as a process of the law.”

According to NDTV, the minister claimed there were many aspects that led to the remission of the sentences but mentioned only their behaviour. “I don’t want to go into the details,” he said.

Joshi added that the Union government was not singularly responsible for the decision to release the convicts.

(With PTI inputs)

The Incompatibility of Authoritarian Regimes and Scientific Research

The former keeps building glass cages to fight change, and the latter is really, really good with a hammer.

The constitution of India, adopted by the constituent assembly 70 years ago on November 26, 1949, is the world’s longest sovereign document.

The document and its contents continue to play an important part of public conversations today, and a part of this persistence owes itself to the document’s physical form.

The original English version weighs about 13 kg, has 221 sheets and was calligraphed by Prem Behari Narain Raizada. The Hindi version weighs about 14 kg, has 252 pages and was calligraphed by Basantrao Vaidya.

The government tasked the National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi, with preserving these versions and protecting them against “oxidation, microbiological deterioration and air-pollution damages” – a significant charge considering the state of Delhi’s air and water these days.

In response, the NPL developed “hermetically sealed”, or airtight, glass cases with the Getty Conservation Institute in 1993 and installed them at the Parliament Library in March 1994.

It is wonderful that one of the country’s premier labs is watching out for the physical constitution but, at the same time, the allegories the endeavour presents for the India of 2019 are inescapable.

I’m sure someone has said this before, but it seems to me that the first casualty of an authoritarian regime is always history – in more ways than one. It is not just that history must be rewritten to whitewash their grotesque and illegitimate rise to power, but also that when they do take power, their rhetoric is peppered generously with talk of a return to an ancient, glorious past – one that may very well never have existed, but whose existence is insisted upon emphatically.

“We must,” it is argued, “pick up from where we lost our way.”

Also read: The Modi Government’s Surgical Strike Against Science and Scholarship

The time then comes to atone for the sins we committed along the way. So every redemptive motion, every step we took towards a more equitable, just, and kind society, must now be taken in reverse, so that we may once again return to our barbaric past.

Hatchets that were buried must be dug up, olive branches must be burned, and doves must be shot.

Progressive movements find themselves hermetically sealed, their oxygen supply cut off so that they are perfectly preserved in stasis. Mute, unresponsive, impotent, and trapped behind glass, they remain curiosities from a poorly remembered time.

Scientific research does the opposite. It embraces the right to revolt, and welcomes new generations of disruptive and playful children. It preserves ideas by disseminating them, by pouring the ideas in its journals into the minds and onto the lips of young men and women – not by encasing those sheets of paper in glass.

It embraces the inevitable rot and decay, the processes of oxidation and reduction. It recognises that what withers away must do so as necessarily as the planets keep orbit around the Sun, and attempts to understand why.

Authoritarian regimes and scientific research are incompatible. Because the former keeps building glass cages to fight change, and the latter is really, really good with a hammer.

Madhusudhan Raman is a postdoctoral fellow at the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai.

Featured image credit: Vlad Kutepov/Unsplash

Gujarat Schools and Article 370: Education as Political Propaganda

The education department’s order to celebrate the ‘success’ of scrapping Article 370 is unambiguously not to allow young people to “debate”.

The Ahmedabad education department has issued a circular to all “government-grant-in-aid and self-financed secondary and higher secondary schools to arrange special lectures, debate, essay and elocution competitions and group discussions on the subject of Article 370 and Article 35A during the school assembly on Prime  Minister Narendra Modi’s birthday on September 17.”

The circular reportedly notes that “this touches the social science subject of secondary and higher secondary education.”

Just when one was beginning to be rather happily thrilled at this new attention to “social sciences” on behalf of the ruling BJP administration, and the encouragement given to students to “debate,” the cat was predictably out of the bag.

Not taking any risk with the suggested debate, the said “circular” takes care to lay down what is to be said in the “debate”.  It notes: “Under Article 370 and 35A the Indian parliament has taken an appreciative and people-oriented step that has received lot of appreciation from the entire country.”

Also Read: For Modi’s Birthday, Gujarat Schools Ordered to Celebrate ‘Success’ of Article 370 Decision

Clearly, the “circular” underscores the fact that the “event” – to be conducted ostensibly as part of  a “social science” deliberation – is not intended to be so much scientific as hagiographic, since all participants are already instructed that only one thing may be said about what has been done, namely  appreciation.

Interestingly, the circular mentions that “experts” may also be invited. It hardly needs to be said that the “experts” will all need to be of one mind.

The purpose behind the move, then, seems unambiguously not to allow young people to actually “debate” the complicated pros and cons of the scrapping of Article 370 but a crassly instrumentalist one – to get them to consolidate the view that nobody, but nobody, may be on the other side of the debate “in the entire country.” If “social science” were a living being, one must wonder what view she might have taken of her substance and use.

The fact is that never was there a greater need to harken to the “social sciences” than in our day.

A member of the security forces stands guard in Kashmir. Photo: PTI

In cannily justifying the proposed school “debate” as a curricular activity falling under a “social science” syllabus, the circular, of course, makes no reference to the many other issues that might usefully and verily be “debated” as part of such a curriculum. Just to name a few: caste oppression, communal hegemony, mob lynchings, gender discrimination, the causes of joblessness, identity politics, retrograde myths and legends, gross inequalities of income and opportunity, widespread lacunae in the criminal justice system and in the operations of state agencies — all now and again receiving some debate, however loaded or cacophonous, in media channels. All these topics and much more fall genuinely within the ambit of a “social science” intellectual expanse.

What a wonderful thing it would have been had this new invocation of “social  science” been driven by the impulse to an open-ended enquiry and debate in schools, colleges, among voluntary groups of concerned citizens, seeking not merely to laud the reading down of Article 370 etc., but to examine the many social fault-lines that bedevil the republic.

But then, if the experience of recent years is anything to go by, there seems a clear injunction not only as to what subjects may be debated but how and to what purpose.

And imagine the laurels that would accrue to the honourable prime minister if his birthdays were indeed to be made occasions for such wide-ranging and inclusive debates and discussions.

Given Modiji’s democratic credentials, it is still to be hoped that the kind of debate the Ahmedabad education department has proposed, rather enjoined, will be gently discouraged, and substituted by an encouragement to India’s millennials to fearlessly voice their views on the whole spectrum of issues indicated above.

Also Read: ‘Urgent, Disturbing’: PIL in SC on Kashmir Children ‘Illegally Detained, Maimed’

As to the subject proposed by the Ahmedabad education department, one may invite them to consider the irony of the claim that the “entire country” has appreciated the measure taken by parliament when, in fact, those countrymen and women who are most affected by it remain either locked down or objects of so stringent a suspicion that  their voices  are required to be gagged through an unprecedented denial of  all sources of communication to them – barring the measly landlines which, much of the time, fail to work.

Clearly, were representatives from Kashmiri schools to be invited to the proposed debate, a whole different perspective might become available to the young ones in Ahmedabad schools, and the “entire country.”

For now, however, “social science” scholars and teachers may draw suitable conclusions as to what is expected of their subject and of them.

Badri Raina taught at Delhi University.

How Seriously Should We Take Sitharaman’s Idea of Zero Budget Farming? 

India is still struggling with a holistic plan for doubling farmer income by 2022.

Around 38% of India’s households were self-employed in agriculture during 2017-18, according to the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) findings. In the same year, the PLFS notes, casual labour in agriculture was recorded at 12.1%.

Put together, this implies that as of 2017-18, nearly 50% of India’s total households were dependent on agriculture for their livelihood.  

Even though food grain production has increased by 33.4% over the last decade, there has not been much improvement in the well-being of India’s farmers in the same period. The current agrarian distress and news of agitations by farmer organisations in different parts of the country bears testimony to this fact. 

It was hoped that the recently elected government with a huge mandate would have some serious policy measures to assuage the hard condition of the farmers. Much was expected from Friday’s Budget, but it left much to be hoped for.

Zero budget or zero costs?

The Budget speech presented on Friday mentioned the word ‘agriculture’ only three times. And, that too without substantiating on the policies mentioned. Both this year’s budget document and the Economic Survey 2018-19 released on Thursday focus on adoption of ‘Zero Budget Natural Farming’ (ZBNF). 

This is a practice where farmers adopt traditional practices of farming, leading to a decline in the usage of chemicals and pesticides, promoting soil health and other environmental benefits. The argument goes that this may help in not only improving land productivity, but also contribute towards doubling of farmer income.

It is not clear from the budget document what is actually meant by ZBNF though. Going by the footnote in the Economic Survey ZBNF is “(farming) without using any credit, and without spending any money on purchased inputs‘’. 

According to this definition ‘zero budget’ would just imply zero costs. Inputs used in any production process has a price and as such a cost of using that input. Even if an input is found freely available in nature (say, rainwater used for irrigation), it will always have an opportunity cost (may be the water could have been used for some other productive purpose). 

Also Read: Nirmala Sitharaman’s Maiden Budget is an Exercise in Taming Policy Uncertainty

Thus, zero budgeting of agricultural production is not quite possible. The policy of ZBNF also does not mention whether ‘zero budget’ implies zero input. Simple microeconomic theory informs us that in any production function, for production to take place the inputs have to non-zero. A zero usage of input will lead to an outcome of zero production. Farmers may want to do better than that.

The Economic Survey informs us that this ZBNF programme is being implemented in around 972 villages in India. Though being claimed in the budget as an ‘innovative model’, its efficacy in improving agricultural production and enhancing farmers’ income is still unknown. It is debatable whether ZBNF can be adopted on a large scale. Modern agriculture demands the use of new technologies like better seeds, feeds, machineries, fertilizers, storage facilities, etc.

 It is highly unlikely that such modern technologies would be traditionally available for free.

PM Modi farmers, PM Kisan Scheme, Modi farmers

PM Narendra Modi during the launch of the PM Kisan Yojana in Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh on February 24, 2019. Credit: PIB_India/Twitter

For whom do the farmers toil?

Among many other suggestions, the government’s road map for achieving the target of doubling farmer income by 2022 emphasises on improving agricultural productivity. In her Budget speech, the finance minister mentioned that India has become self-sufficient in pulses and shall soon become self-sufficient in oilseeds production. Raising production and enhancing productivity is necessary for securing food sufficiency and consumer interest. 

However, increase in production, and hence supply, leads to a fall in prices. This in turn upsets the interests of the producers – the farmers. Thus, the government has to maintain a precarious balance by looking into the needs of both the producers and the consumers.

‘Nudging’ farmers to grow a particular crop (say, pulses) by raising the minimum support orice (MSP) and then ending up with a bumper production and prices crashing down may leave the farmers in huge distress. There are other aspects to be taken care of such as procurement facilities, storage, transport, etc. These supply side issues need to be taken care of. There was no mention about these aspects in today’s budget.

Beyond PM Kisan, no ideas?

The Economic Survey notes that for effective policy implementation it is necessary to have authentic data. However, the government needs to do much more in terms of agricultural data. The policy for doubling of farmer income by 2022 might become incalculable – and may meet with the same fate as the GDP data – as there are no recent assessments of agricultural households. The last all-India situation assessment survey of agricultural households was conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) for the year 2012-13. 

This is perhaps enough time to assess the current agricultural scenario and farmers’ income. Most of the policy estimates of the government are based on this 2012-13 survey data. There is a need for real-time assessment of the condition of India’s farmers. 

The budget allocation for the department of agriculture, cooperation and farmers’ welfare has been increased substantially from Rs 67,800 crore during 2018-19 to around Rs. 1,30,485.21 crore. But, much of the expenditure is under revenue head rather than capital expenditure. 

One of the centrally sponsored schemes – Pradhan Mantri Kishan Samman Nidhi (PM-KISAN) – was implemented just before the tenure of the last government ended. The scheme ensured an annual direct transfer of Rs 6,000 to small and marginal farmers in three equal installments of Rs 2,000. The scheme was implemented with an annual outlay of Rs 75,000 crore. However, the new government extended it to all farmers irrespective of landholding size. But, the budget outlay for this scheme has remained at Rs 75,000 crore in Friday’s budget.

Varun Kumar Das is with the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai

UN Rapporteurs Urge India Again to Release Ailing Activist-Academic G.N. Saibaba

The academic was arrested in May 2014 for his alleged links to Maoists and for “waging war” against India, and was sentenced to life imprisonment 2017.

New Delhi: Five special rapporteurs of the United Nations have yet again called upon the Indian government to “immediately release” ailing human rights activist and former Delhi University professor G.N. Saibaba from custody.

Wheelchair bound Saibaba, who was sentenced to life imprisonment in March 2017 for “waging war against the state” among other charges, has been unwell for some time and his “health is seriously deteriorating”. Saibaba is reportedly kept in solitary confinement at the Nagpur Central Jail, Maharashtra.

In a press communique this past April 30, special rapporteurs Michel Forst (on the situation of human rights defenders), Catalina Devandas (on the rights of persons with disabilities), Agnes Callamard (on extra-judicial summary or arbitrary executions) and Dainius Puras (on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and Nils Melzer (on torture and other cruel and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) said, “Dr. Saibaba’s health problems require immediate and sustained medical attention and are reaching a point of being life-threatening.”

Also read: UN Rights Experts Urge India to Release Jailed Delhi University Professor Saibaba

This past March 25, Saibaba’s bail petition on health grounds and suspension of the sentence was rejected by the Bombay high court. 

Calling him a leading voice defending the rights of religious minorities, adivasis (tribals) and Dalits, the UN experts said that he continued to be kept “in so-called anda-cells” (egg shell-cells) with no windows, extreme temperatures and inaccessible facilities. “Dr. Saibaba also lacks reasonable accommodation in detention, i.e. the necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments to enable him to enjoy his human rights as any other prisoner.”

“India is bound by its international obligations to ensure that persons with disabilities deprived of their liberty are provided with reasonable accommodation, accessible healthcare, as well as continuous and appropriate medical treatment and rehabilitation,” the experts said in the communique.

“The denial of such conditions can be considered a form of discrimination, and may amount to torture or ill-treatment. Moreover, prolonged solitary confinement may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and, in some circumstances, even to torture,” they said.

The rapporteurs mentioned that at the time of his arrest in 2014, he suffered an injury to his left hand, but was “not provided with appropriate medical treatment and rehabilitation. The latest reports indicate that he is in extreme pain and is no longer responding to drugs and sedatives.”

Also read: Delhi University Professor Saibaba Sentenced to Life for ‘Maoist Links’

This past December 21, the rapporteurs had written to the Narendra Modi government expressing “serious concern” over his deteriorating health condition and drew it attention to Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) acceded to by India on 10 April 1979.

The Article establishes the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health as well as relevant States’ obligations. “Inter alia, state’s must refrain from denying or limiting equal access for prisoners or detainees to preventive, curative and palliative health services (Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 14, para.34).”

The letter said:

“In this connection, the ‘Mandela Rules’ further establish that the provision of healthcare for prisoners is a state responsibility and further elaborates on this. All prisoners, including persons with disabilities, shall have prompt access to medical attention in urgent cases and be transferred to specialised institutions or to civil hospitals when specialised treatment or surgery is required. Furthermore, the imposition of solitary confinement should be prohibited in the case of prisoners with mental or physical disabilities when their conditions would be exacerbated by such measures. All prisoners, and third parties appointed by them, should be granted access to their medical files (including prescribed medicines) upon request.”

The UN experts said on April 30 that they have not received any reply to the letter from the government.

Cabinet Passes Amendments to Allow Voluntary Seeding of Aadhaar with Bank Accounts, SIM Cards

Amendments to two existing laws were necessary after the Supreme Court struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act earlier this year.

New Delhi: The Cabinet on Monday approved amending two existing laws to provide legal backing for seeding of Aadhaar with mobile numbers and bank accounts, sources said.

The Cabinet, headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, approved amendments to the Telegraph Act and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

These amendments were made necessary after the Supreme Court in September imposed restrictions on the use of Aadhaar by private companies.

Sources said the two Acts will be amended to provide for voluntary sharing of the 12-digit identification number for obtaining new mobile phone connections and for opening bank accounts.

Also read: How Did the EC Link 300 Million Voter IDs to Aadhaar In Just a Few Months?

The Supreme Court had struck down Section 57 of the Aadhaar Act that made seeding of the biometric ID with SIMs and bank accounts mandatory, saying it had no legal backing. To overcome this lacuna, the Telegraph Act is being amended to provide legal backing for the issuance of mobile SIMs through Aadhaar. Similarly, the amendment to the PMLA will give individuals option to link their bank accounts to Aadhaar in the KYC option.

Also read: After Supreme Court Verdict, What Needs to Be Linked With Aadhaar and What Doesn’t

The apex court in a landmark judgment had held constitutional validity of Aadhaar for the distribution of state-sponsored welfare subsidies but ruled that it cannot be made mandatory for opening bank accounts or providing mobile-phone connections. The ruling followed petitions by activists and lawyers citing privacy concerns.

Conceptualised under the previous UPA regime in 2009, under the extraordinary Aadhaar programme provides for giving every resident a biometric ID by assigning a unique 12-digit identification number after collecting their biometric data and photographs. It was envisioned as a cost-saving tool that could improve the delivery of services and subsidies to poor by eliminating bogus beneficiaries and checking diversions.