Revisiting the Aadhaar Act: Access to Biometric Data for Forensic Purposes (GS Paper 2, Polity & Governance)
Context
- The Aadhaar Act, which governs the collection and use of biometric data, is designed with strict safeguards to protect individuals' privacy.
- However, there is growing debate over whether these provisions should be re-evaluated in specific contexts, such as forensic investigations involving unidentified bodies.
- In certain situations, the need to balance privacy protections with the necessity of identifying deceased individuals becomes critical.
- This article explores the potential benefits of allowing limited access to Aadhaar biometric data for forensic purposes, while maintaining safeguards to protect privacy.
Introduction
- The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has implemented strict regulations regarding the disclosure of personal data, with the core intent of protecting individual privacy and preventing data misuse.
- Under normal circumstances, law enforcement agencies do not have access to the Aadhaar database, including both demographic and biometric details.
- The Aadhaar Act restricts access to biometric data, specifically fingerprints and iris scans, and allows for data disclosure only under strict court orders, specifically those from a High Court or higher judicial authority.
The Dilemma: Balancing Privacy with Dignity
- In cases where unidentified bodies are discovered, the ability to match fingerprints with Aadhaar data could play a crucial role in quickly identifying the deceased.
- While the Aadhaar Act’s provisions on biometric data are vital to protecting privacy, there is a compelling argument for reconsidering these restrictions in exceptional circumstances, particularly when it comes to ensuring the dignity of individuals and providing closure to their families.
Legal Considerations: Respectful Treatment of the Deceased
- Indian courts have consistently ruled that the treatment of deceased bodies must be respectful and humane.
- High Court and Supreme Court decisions have underscored the importance of ensuring that bodies, especially those of marginalized individuals, are treated with dignity.
- For instance, the courts have criticized inhumane practices, such as the prolonged display of a prisoner's body following execution, and stressed the importance of ensuring the respectful repatriation of migrant workers' remains from abroad.
- Such rulings emphasize the need to avoid further indignities to those who have already suffered during their lives.
Characteristics of Unidentified Deceased Persons
- Many unidentified bodies are those of economically disadvantaged individuals, often migrants or daily wage laborers.
- These individuals may not have close family connections, which makes it harder for law enforcement to track down their identities.
- They are sometimes found on highways, in makeshift shelters, or as victims of accidents or violent crimes.
- Due to a lack of documentation or communication with family, many of these people never get reported as missing.
- The situation becomes even more complicated when the deceased is a victim of a crime, with perpetrators attempting to conceal evidence by leaving bodies in remote or hard-to-reach areas.
Current Investigative Practices
When a body is discovered and remains unidentified, police typically follow standard investigative procedures. This includes documenting distinguishing features, collecting evidence from the scene, reviewing surveillance footage, and attempting to match the body with missing person reports. In some cases, fingerprints are collected and sent to forensic experts or fingerprint bureaus to check against criminal databases. However, the effectiveness of this approach is limited by several factors:
- Limited databases: Many fingerprint databases used by law enforcement are confined to criminal records, and in some states, these records are not even fully digitized.
- Inconsistent data: The lack of comprehensive and easily accessible national fingerprint databases means that cross-referencing data can be slow and inefficient.
In such cases, Aadhaar's biometric data could serve as a critical tool in identifying the deceased. If a match is found, it could help provide closure to the family and allow authorities to proceed with further investigation, such as determining whether the death was accidental or a result of foul play.
Legal Barriers in the Aadhaar Act
- Currently, the Aadhaar Act imposes a blanket prohibition on sharing "core biometric information" under any circumstances.
- While this is essential for protecting individual privacy, it creates challenges for law enforcement when it comes to identifying deceased persons.
- In contrast, countries like the United States have systems that allow law enforcement agencies to access biometric data for deceased persons through databases like the Deceased Persons Identification (DPI) Services, which help match fingerprints against extensive government databases.
The Need for Rethinking Restrictions
- While protecting privacy remains a cornerstone of the Aadhaar framework, there is a valid argument for revisiting the Act’s restrictions in specific situations.
- When it comes to identifying deceased individuals—particularly those whose identities might not otherwise be known—the need for identification must be weighed against the right to privacy.
- A careful balance should be struck to ensure that the privacy of living individuals is not compromised, while also ensuring that law enforcement can access critical data for the identification of the deceased.
A Potential Legal Framework for Accessing Biometric Data
One possible approach to balancing privacy concerns with the need for effective identification is to allow limited access to Aadhaar biometric data for forensic purposes under well-defined legal mechanisms. This could involve:
- FIR-based access: Access could be granted based on the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) related to the discovery of an unidentified body. This would ensure that the request for data is grounded in a legitimate investigative process.
- Magistrate oversight: Rather than requiring a High Court order, which may be burdensome for routine cases, a jurisdictional magistrate could authorize the release of biometric data for identification purposes.
- Legal safeguards: The use of Aadhaar data would be strictly limited to identifying the deceased, with clear protocols to ensure that privacy rights are respected and the data is not misused.
This approach could streamline investigations, speed up the identification of unknown bodies, and provide closure to families, all while safeguarding individual rights.
Conclusion
- Reevaluating the restrictions on sharing Aadhaar biometric data in specific contexts, such as identifying deceased individuals, is not just a matter of convenience for law enforcement.
- It is also a matter of upholding the constitutional right to life and dignity, which extends beyond mere existence.
- By exploring legal mechanisms that allow for access to Aadhaar data under carefully defined circumstances, India can strike a balance between privacy and the need for identification in critical forensic situations.
- In doing so, the law can ensure that those who are marginalized, economically disadvantaged, or otherwise deprived of justice are afforded the dignity and closure they deserve.
