Thursday, December 22, 2011

India: Lawyer Sanjay Parikh Unconvincingly Urges Biometric System Boycott

At the end of yesterday's post on Iraq, I wrote:
"It's also important to draw a contrast between violations of privacy that lead to more spam, phishing and identity fraud and the kind of privacy violation that can lead to political persecution, torture, prison and loss of life."
I've also been known to make a big deal out of the difference between Privacy and Anonymity (even more here).

So, I think it makes sense to reformulate the Privacy sentence above in terms of Anonymity as:
It's important to draw a contrast between the type of anonymity that can protect against more spam, social awkwardness and a loss of privacy in public and the kind of anonymity that can lead to political powerlessness, lack of social mobility, poverty and a shortened lifespan.
People with a legitimate ID tend to think of anonymity in terms of the first formulation, those who have anonymity forced upon them tend to suffer from the afflictions of the second formulation.

If a majority of Indians able to express their political rights agree with Sanjay Parikh, all Indians will suffer, but not equally. Those living in a condition of forced anonymity will continue to live lives of deprivation and poverty. Those who have legitimate ID will continue to subsidize corruption and continue to live in the midst of unnecessary suffering in a country that fails to assume a station in world affairs more befitting the world's second-most-populated nation and its largest democracy.

Lawyer urging people to boycott the world's largest biometric database (Sky News)

[Feb. 5, 2013 -- EDIT: The embed code for the video is broken but the link above is still good]