Without a smooth Aadhar system in place, direct benefits transfer to individual bank accounts — without leakage along the way — will continue to suffer hiccups
Some controversy, and a lack of clarity, has been associated with the Aadhar card, symbolised by the unique identity number, from its inception. It was believed by not a few that this was a strategem devised by the state to pry into the lives of individuals as getting a UID number involved taking one’s fingerprints, photograph and iris specifications.
This exaggerated fear of Big Brother watching was doused considerably with greater clarity emerging about Aadhar, and it is now reasonably clear that in the first instance this scheme is intended to deliver state subsidies and similar benefits only to the deserving, and weeding out the others.
To this extent, it is important for the Aadhar to work well on the ground. The way matters stand, the scheme has been found to be inefficient. Many who submitted the necessary details to get a UID number have been waiting for months after the completion of formalities. For this reason, the Supreme Court’s order on Monday, which holds that possessing UID digits cannot be the sole criterion for the disbursal of benefits to the needy, has not come a day too late.
When the Aadhar card is yet to be delivered by the government machinery, it is shortsighted of some states, including Delhi, to insist on it while delivering socio-economic benefits. The Supreme Court’s intervention is, therefore, welcome. At least, the needy won’t be denied what is due to them, and they can continue to present the more traditionally accepted documents and identity proofs to establish their credentials to be eligible for state assistance.
But we should clearly understand that, with time, the Aadhar card should become irreplaceable as a foolproof means to establish identity. The Supreme Court has quite appropriately noted, however, that the Aadhar card must not be issued to foreigners living illegally in India (for want of due diligence). This entails linking the present mode of issuing the card to verification of nationality. This might pose problems regarding procedure and management, and linking the Aadhar authority to the police system, which checks nationality antecedents, for there are indications of a few million foreigners from neighbouring nations trying to melt into our population. The numbers are by no means frightening, and we cannot yield to xenophobia, but a clear system needs to exist.
Without a smooth Aadhar system in place, direct benefits transfer (DBT) to individual bank accounts — without leakage along the way — will continue to suffer hiccups. As such, the UPA-2, which might have hoped to derive some political benefit from introducing the scheme, may find itself at a slight disadvantage due to the Supreme Court ruling. But all things considered, the scheme is a beneficial one.
Post new comment