Guest post by TAHA MEHMOOD

I – The spread of Identity cards in Southasia:

An identity card virus seems to be spreading across south-Asia. The pathogen emerged long ago in 1971, when Pakistan established a paper based personal identity system. !971 was also the year when Pakistan was engaged with India in a military conflict which led to the creation of Bangladesh. In 1972, a year later, the Department of Registrations of Persons located at Colombo, Sri Lanka, was entrusted with the responsibility of issuing a national identity to citizens who were over sixteen years of age. In 1972 the name of the island was changed from Ceylon to Sri Lanka and Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran formed the Tamil New Tigers (TNT), which later became LTTE or Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. The state of Sri Lanka was at war with LTTE for the next three decades. Nothing new happened on the national identity card front for the next two decades.

In 1996, during the Benazir Bhutto regime, there were talks of abolishing paper identity cards in Pakistan. The idea was to introduce digital identity cards instead. IBM was given the responsibility to help government issue digital national identity cards to all Pakistanis. This move was quickly abandoned when the rival Muslim League government came to power. A new body was constituted. In 2000 a National Database Organization was established under a serving General of the Pakistani army and National Database & Registration Authority (NADRA) came into being. By 2004 NADRA was functional. Later, NADRA helped Bangladesh to plan its own identity document in the name of High Security Driver’s license, but this document did not cover all Bangladeshis.

In 2008 Bangladesh introduced a digital national identity card. Around that time plans were underway to introduce National Identity cards in India and Nepal. India had started tinkering with the idea of an identity document after the end of Kargil War with Pakistan in 1998. A Multi-purpose National Identity Card for all Indians was planned. But this was not the original plan. The original plan was to issue an identity card to all villagers near the international border to forestall a kargil type situation. But later it was decided to issue an identity card to all Indians. We don’t know who made this decision, we don’t know why was it decided. No information is available in the public domain to shed light on these crucial events and the rationale behind it. The Vajpayee government was in power when the pilot project started. However, suddenly all its operations were dissolved midway. The Vajpayee government lost power in 2004 general elections. When UPA came to power for the second time a new organization called the Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI) was created under the chairmanship of Nandan Nilekani.

Of all the national identity cards experiments, not only in Southasia but elsewhere in the world, the Indian version, is by far the biggest in scope and scale. The Government of India is selling the idea of an identity card under various strategies.

For instance, a national identity card is supposed to bring the poorest of the poor towards the mainstream, it is supposed to provide jobs to millions of qualified technicians, belonging to middle class India, the security agencies will have a robust data base to keep check of any anti-national activities and so on.

 

2 – Scope of personal identity document market in India

On Thursday, the 21^st Sept 2010, news started to come in that, the Unique Identification Authority of India has short-listed nine IT firms, which includes companies like IBM, Accenture, Wipro, TCS and HP. These firms are going to act as Managed Service Providers for the Unique Identity Authority of India (UIDAI). The bidding process to give a contract worth 2000 crore rupees (440 Milion USD) is going to begin soon. This contract which is nearly half a billion dollars is merely a fraction of what the final bill, of providing an identity document to each Indian, will amount to. One could imagine that such a large re-distribution of public money in favor of private sector companies is bound to create a lot of jobs. Any country needs jobs for young qualified citizens. And any program, which results in creation of jobs is good, yet, in this case, it may not be sustainable for, perhaps one fundamental reason.

Central to the view of Unique Identification Authority of India is a fuzzy notion called identity of an individual human being. UIDAI is of the opinion that individual identity can be scientifically measured. Irrespective of the fact that-no measure of individual identity exists anywhere in the world. The enthusiasm, which we are seeing in India, is unprecedented. There is no nation state in the world, which has completely documented each and every citizen as they are and not as they claim to be. Sometimes people may misrepresent themselves for a variety of reasons and at other times, the State misrepresents its people because of lack of proper documentation, but at no time in history has a nation state identified all its citizens as they are.

 

3 – The fuzzy logic of identity

For scholars who are interested in mapping individual identity, a true measure of unique individual identity comes across, at best, as a dilemma and at worst, as an ambiguity. Simply put identity appears as fuzzy. But this fuzziness of identity is not a new predicament. It’s been around for centuries. Who are you? How can we re-identify a particular person as that particular person? Can an identity of a person be reproduced on a document? These questions have been critical to the debate.

Identity may appear as a cohesive concept from a distance but it gets fuzzier when we move closer. What do we mean by individual identity? For many people the notion of identity presents itself as a paradox just like the ship of Theseus[i]. Plutarch, the ancient Roman historian, for instance, wrote about a ship of Theseus. Theseus was the mythical king who founded the city of Athens. For many centuries the citizens of Athens had preserved a ship, believed to be the ship of Theseus. The ship had thirty Oars. Over the years, slowly, one by one, the oars of the ship started to decay and were subsequently replaced by new ones, which were made of sturdier wood. When Plutarch thought about the ship, he was in two minds. It was not clear to him which ship was the original one. He thought, how could anyone claim that a ship, which had all the new oars, was the original ship? What if someone were to reconstruct another ship made from all the decayed oars and planks. Would that be the original ship of Theseus? If so, then what will happen to this new ship which Athenians believed to be the Ship of Theseus? Plutarch didn’t know which was which.

I wonder, can we apply the analogy of the Ship of Theseus to our bodies? Over the years our bodies undergo change. Just like the oars of ship of Theseus were constantly being reconstructed, by replacing old, decaying, non-usable oars by new ones, so too our body is constantly undergoing change and constantly replacing old pieces of skin, flesh, blood by new ones. Are we then the same person as we were before? Which part of our bodies persists from childhood to old age?

 

4 – Maybe some oars never decay

In UIDAI’s view, a citizen of India could be re-identified as the same person, because certain aspects of his life do not change. Therefore, if a map of those aspects is created then a citizen’s identity can be measured. In a way, UIDAI seems to be suggesting that some oars of a citizen’s ship are irreplaceable.

UIDAi’s method of measuring the individual identity of an Indian citizen rests on many aspects that define his life, like name, date of birth, place of birth and permanent residential address etc but these aspects are not stable markers of his self or is it? A lot of people may change their names without bothering for proper documentation, some may not remember their date of birth, and few may not have a permanent address at all. Therefore UIDAI thought of bringing three more aspects i.e. finger and iris prints and facial scans to measure the identity of a citizen. The underlying assumption appears to be that with finger and iris prints and facial scans, an identity of a person can be linked to his body, creating a much more robust identity document. It is also believed that finger and iris prints of an individual do not change in a lifetime. But is it entirely true? Do these oars not decay at all?

Nandan Nilekani, the man who heads UIDAI, certainly seems to think so, he, for instance, while replying to a question said that, ‘While fingerprint stability begins at the age of 15, the iris stabilises at 5. Hence, all children above 5 will be mapped and given UID numbers.’[ii] Nilekani may have all the good intentions in mind while presenting this view but how will his team of enumerators and verifiers know how old a child is. Are all children who are born in India given a birth certificate? Can no birth certificate be faked?

But for a moment let’s not fret over the date of births, rather, instead let us look at these three oars, which, in UIDAI’s view, are eternal.

 

5 – The three eternal oars

Let’s take fingerprints first. Fingerprints are impressions left by patterns of friction ridges of a human finger. Friction ridges are only naturally hairless parts of a human body. It is formed on the inner surface of the hand and soles of the feet. Skin has two aspects- epidermis, which is the outer layer and dermis, which is inner layer. Patterns are formed on dermis due to the arrangement of sweat glands, bloods vessels and nerves. When a finger is pressed on a scanner epidermis merely carry those impressions on to its surface and leave a mark.

Epidermis undergoes repair throughout one’s life. Dermis is more or less stable. Therefore even when cuts and abrasions occur on the epidermis, the fingerprints are not changed, as dermis, which is the source of impressions is not disturbed at all. However, if, a cut is deep and it manages to break the arrangement of patterns of various elements below the dermis, a permanent scar is created. UIDAI’s enrolment operators are supposed to collect the fingerprints of each and every citizen. This is how, they plan to scan fingerprints, ‘The images of fingerprints are scanned through a physical contact with the platen (transparent glass surface of the fingerprint scanner) and the resulting image is stored in the computer.’[iii]

Although India may be shining for a select few, however for most Indians, poverty is an undeniable reality. Most working poor in India use their hands extensively throughout the day. Hands are used to pick weights, to plough fields, to dig earth, to build houses, to make products, to wash clothes, to clean streets, to ferry goods etc. Most craftsmen, daily wage earners, industrial or agricultural labor, workers employed in unorganized or organized sector hardly cover their hands with gloves or any other protective material while working. It is here that the issue of collecting fingerprints requires a serious debate; I don’t know why social commentators and public intellectuals alike seem to be ignoring this issue?

Hands of working poor get dirty, burned, bruised, or get hardened on an everyday basis. Hands of many laborers may be afflicted with calluses thereby thwarting any attempt to gain a clean impression of the pattern on a friction ridge. Although it is not normal, however, many who use their hands for purposes of work, may be exposed to accidents, which could permanently alter a fingerprint impression. Secondly, to obtain a clean print, ideally, there must be no foreign particles between the prints and the scanner. Because the platen, the transparent glass surface of the fingerprint scanner, may read everything which is presented to it as data. The general environment of most of the central and western provincial states of India, including, Rajasthan, the state where I belong to, is laden with dust. It is highly unlikely that dust particles can be persuaded to remain absent, during such time when a UIDAI enrolment operator is visiting a village. Therefore there is a high possibility that dust particles may be scanned together with a finger or thumb while taking a print, which may result in recording of inaccurate data. I wonder what may happen during a routine verification process later on? Would the impressions of thumb or fingers change when, for instance, a person has washed his hands or his callus or bruise has healed and he submits his prints again for a match? Will his claim on who he is be diminished? May be or maybe not. We don’t know.

How is UIDAI going to ensure that all the fingerprints are clean? What will happen to identities or claims to self of those working poor of India whose fingerprints are not somewhat legible or completely illegible?

The points, which I have raised, are of course speculative. There is huge gap between reality of collecting fingerprints as it is being projected, perceived to be and as it may be. I may be somewhat wrong in raising these points, but I maybe somewhat right too. I tried to find some public data on the conditions of hands of working poor in India. There was none. I thought UIDAI’s website may have some reports. The UIDAI’s website is excellently designed. There seems to be a lot of earnestness in sharing as much information with public as possible, however, it is regrettable that there was no section to shed light on logistical problems, which UIDAI might be facing while collecting fingerprints. There were no field reports. No critical self- assessment. Why such secrecy? One does not know what is actually happening in the field. What one knows, is a view, which people associated with UIDAI are constantly projecting to the media, that finger and iris prints are inalienable markers of one’s identity. I am not sure whether the claims of people associated with UIDAI are legitimate. I have tried to list some dilemmas, which I think could thwart any well-intentioned attempt to collect clean fingerprints. Now lets look at the issue of Iris prints.

 

6 – What’s in an iris?

Iris is an internal organ of the body. It is the only internal organ, which is visible from outside. The role of the iris is to control the amount of light, which is entering through pupil. No two Irises are identical. Therefore patterns on Iris are unique. And it can be scanned easily. However problem arises when a person is suffering from a visual disability. Data related to visual disability in India suggests that as of 2002 half a million Indians were blind, and two hundred thousand were suffering from low vision disability[iv]. Rural Indians have four times as much visual disability than urban Indians. Moreover visual disability seems to an old age problem in India, with over two thirds of the visually disabled people being sixty years old or over.[v] This data is eight years old. We do not know what is the situation now. Public health in rural India has not improved in the last eight years. Blindness may not have assumed epidemic proportions in urban India but urban Indians have to deal with other diseases like diabetes and glaucoma.

Studies suggest that there are as many as 30 Million Indians are diagnosed with diabetes[vi], the actual number may be higher. Diabetes may lead to acute diabetes in few decades. We all know that acute diabetes may result in retinopathy[vii]. Retinopathy is a condition, which occurs ten to twenty years after the onset of diabetes. In severe retinopathy a fibvrovascular layer starts to grow along the iris, which may affect a change in its patterns. Diabetic retinopathy may lead to Glaucoma. But Glaucoma can be caused by other factors too. India is also home to millions of Glaucoma patients[viii]. Glaucoma is a leading cause of blindness in India. Glaucoma is a disease where a cranial nerve, which transmits visual information from retina to brain, is damaged leading to irreversible blindness. And then there are diseases like Anirida.

The most daunting task any researcher on India face is the unavailability of healthy data. Therefore it is not clear how many Indians suffer from these diseases. What is clear is that, Anirida causes absence of iris in both eyes. How are the irises of a citizen of India, who is suffering from Anirida, going to be captured then? There are indications about the presence of Anirida in populations of south India but like I mentioned, we don’t know any actual figures of Indian populations afflicted by this disease[ix].

In all these cases, blindness, retinopathy, glaucoma and anirida scanning the iris to obtain a print becomes difficult. I have not mentioned cataract, which exists in epidemic proportions in rural India. Would an absence of, possibly millions of irises in documenting individual identity, not create a challenge? How is UIDAI going to deal with these problems? Why so much public money is being spent on something, which could potentially exclude millions of vulnerable populations?

In the absence of iris prints, which may result in an incomplete identity document, I wonder whether UIDAI will allow people with incomplete documented identities, to access government schemes? Or will UIDAI not care, arguing instead, that people with visual disabilities are not a statistical threat, and generally approve this seepage of identity to persist? We don’t know. We will have to wait and find out. In the meanwhile, UiDAi enrollment operators are fanning the villages, cities and towns of India to take digital photographs of faces of people together with iris and fingerprints.

 

7 – Can a face be an aadhaar  for individual identity?

Apart from finger and iris prints UIDAI is also interested in taking a portrait photograph of the face of every Indian. But this is not the first time an archive of portraits of citizens is being created. In 1993 the Election Commission of India started a scheme of issuing Electronic Photographic Identity Cards for all voters. Ideally all voters must be Indian citizens. But not all citizens are voters. Some segments of population, like children, who are below the age of eighteen are not allowed to vote. Yet despite number of voter being less than the number of citizens of India, the Election commission as of 2010, that is, seventeen years after the introduction of this scheme, was not able to issue an electronic photo identity card to all voters. A good one-third voters are still to be covered. A minister once, suggested that, intra and inner city migration is one of the main problems for non-issuance of cards[x]. People are constantly on the move in search of work. So how can anyone ensure that they are going to be at their home when a UIDAI enrollment operator is around? What is going to happen to documentation of identities of all those people who are never around because they are constantly on the move in search of work or are iterant businessmen or trades people?

The idea of taking digital photographs is linked with facial recognition technology. Portraits of people are converted into bits of data. Data is fed on a computer algorithm. The algorithm analyses data on as many as eighty aspects of a face like length of the nose, distance of nose from the jaws etc and creates a unique measure for every face. Facial recognition technology has been around since 1960’s. The industry is continuously developing and upgrading algorithms. Each new addition to facial recognition technology is an invitation to improvise further. However, till date there has been no universally acknowledged foolproof system. The main flaw of this technology is that, unless, viewing angle of the face of a subject is correct, right amount of light falls on the subject, and the resolution of capturing device is high- the resultant image may not be verified correctly. It appears that people behind UIDAI are aware of these inefficiencies. As it has been suggested in a UIDAI document titled ‘A training module on working with biometric devices’, that, ’Face biometric is not adequate for making de-duplication process. It is used for verification purposes but does not comply with the accuracy level.’[xi]

If people who are running UIDAI believe that facial recognition technology ‘does not comply with accuracy level’ and it is ‘not adequate for making de-duplication processes’, then why is UIDAI so much interested in investing millions of rupees of tax-payers money to buy expensive digital cameras and storage devices? Who benefits the most in such a transfer of public money? What is the use of creating an archive of faces of all Indians, when people age with every passing second, which result in minute changes on the patterns on their face? When people do all sorts of things to their faces like indulge in Botulinum toxin or Botox treatment, plastic surgery, facial tattoo and what not. Why is public money being diverted for a technology, which has not worked in its earlier avtaar, when EPIC was in use?

One could assume some oars of a human being’s ship may demonstrate persistence and continuity for a lifetime, like the mind of a person but mind cannot be measured. Not yet. Other oars like fingerprints, iris print and a face may offer a reliable measure of identity of a person, but, such a measure may be far from coherent. UIDAI’s method for measuring the personal identity of a citizen of India appears to have little consistency. For instance as literature coming from UIDAI state that facial technology does ‘not comply with accuracy level’, suggest strains of contradictory positions. Yet people associated with UIDAI are projecting a sense of confidence, which might not betray weak foundation on which the idea of documenting personal identity is mounted. But I wonder, would not any structure built on shaky grounds will be a cause for huge concern in times to come, especially to all those who are going to depend on it to prove to everyone else- who they are?

 

References