A+| A| A-
Rebuttal on UIDAI
R S Sharma’s “Identity and the UIDAI: A Response” (EPW, 28 August 2010) argues, in response to Usha Ramanathan’s “A Unique Identity Bill” (EPW, 24 July 2010), that “The UIDAI has stated its role and objectives in various public documents, and also outlined these in its draft bill”, but she has “fundamental misunderstandings” on the UIDAI, that her “suggestion of links to the NATGRID/DNA data banks is pure conjecture” and that her article misrepresents the UIDAI’s stated objectives.
R S Sharma’s “Identity and the UIDAI: A Response” (EPW, 28 August 2010) argues, in response to Usha Ramanathan’s “A Unique Identity Bill” (EPW, 24 July 2010), that “The UIDAI has stated its role and objectives in various public documents, and also outlined these in its draft bill”, but she has “fundamental misunderstandings” on the UIDAI, that her “suggestion of links to the NATGRID/DNA data banks is pure conjecture” and that her article misrepresents the UIDAI’s stated objectives.
Sharma has obviously chosen to ignore the increasing number of articles in the media questioning Aadhaar, written by lawyers, economists, technologists, security professionals, sociologists, civil society supporters, scholars, academics and biometric experts, and the list goes on.