polity

Delhi demolitions: Under the cloak of law

Context: The periodic drama of demolitions of illegal construction has become the unfortunate leitmotif of Delhi’s development. The recent demolitions around Tughlaqabad Fort follow the script that has been enacted innumerable times before. The need to demolish is portrayed as a law and order issue, not the failure of urban planning.

Arguments in favour of demolitions

These colonies are developed on illegal land
They are becoming obstructions in the way of the master plan of Delhi (MPD)
They deface the city.
People living there are involved in the criminal activities.

Issues associated with demolition

Illegal colonies developed due to the inability of MPD to meet the needs of migrant inflow in the city.
This kind of demolition involves only the issue’s legal dimension, leaving the ethical issues unsolved.
The spatial norms, development controls, and even the basic planning ideology on which the present Master Plan of Delhi (and other Indian cities) is based are modelled on urban development strategies that evolved in post-war Europe and the US — under entirely different social, economic and cultural circumstances.
These were eagerly adopted after Independence by the governing elite (including urban planners) because they neatly aligned with their aspirations for creating modern Indian cities.
This model has proved inadequate to handle the complex problems of Indian urbanisation and the nature of indigenous urbanism that underpins the expectations of new migrants.
Elitist mentality of urban developers who treated slums as urban malaise which must be eradicated.
Demolitions have only shifted the focus from the original source of the problem, the flawed MPD and the lack of imaginative governance, to its victims, the migrants and entrepreneurs, who have immeasurably contributed to India’s success story.

Way forward

To begin, the mindset of urban planners, civic authorities and the police must change. They must understand that they are dealing with an ethical, not legal issue.
The success of urban planning should not be contingent on the outcome of the contest between the haves and the have-nots. For one, the needs and aspirations of one are not more legitimate than those of the other.
Second, given the history of urban development of Delhi, aborting the attempts of the have-nots to fulfil their basic needs is not the most efficacious strategy to ensure the success of urban planning.
The have-nots have legitimate status and rights to the city. Therefore, their self-help achievements in the face of the hostility they face from society and the government, should not be treated as a cancerous tumour that needs to be excised to protect the planner’s vision.

Govt widens Aadhar ambit: 22 pvt firms can use it to verify customers

Context: Widening the list of non-banking reporting entities, the Finance Ministry has allowed 22 financial entities — including Amazon Pay (India) Pvt. Ltd, Aditya Birla Housing Finance Ltd and IIFL Finance Ltd — to verify the identity of their customers via Aadhaar under the ambit of the money laundering law.

Widening of Aadhar Ambit

In a notification dated May 4, the Finance Ministry said these reporting entities, other than the banking companies mentioned, shall comply with the standards of privacy and security under the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.
It is necessary and expedient to do so, after consultation with the Unique Identification Authority of India established under sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Aadhaar Act and the appropriate regulator, namely, the Reserve Bank of India, hereby permits the said Reporting Entities to perform authentication under the Aadhaar Act for the purposes of Section 11A of the Money Laundering Act.
Section 11A of PLMA provides for verification of identity by reporting entities. Earlier only banks were considered as reporting entities but now non-banking regulated entities that are considered as reporting entities under PLMA can be allowed to conduct such authentication if their approval is accepted by the UIDAI depending on their data security practices.
In, 2019, the government amended the Aadhaar(Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, under which it allowed only banking and telecom companies to carry out such authentication for KYC requirements.

Application of widening of Aadhaar ambit:

E-KYC carried out through OTP-based Adhaar authentication allows entities to offer a limited set of services to their users. Such a KYC has to be renewed every year and the aggregate amount of term loans sanctioned shall not exceed Rs 60000 in a year.
It may help in expanding the reach of financial services, especially microfinance.
Availability will improve consumption in the Indian economy which fosters the Economic growth of the Nation.
It will help in the expansion of the formal credit network in the Indian economy.

Concerns:

It may lead to an invasion of privacy: Private companies are profit-oriented and they may misuse this limited permission to target the customers.
It may also pose a challenge of financial fraud: in the digital age financial frauds are new realities and allowing private entities to access Addhar data will further increase this threat.
Other private entities may demand the same: with time other private companies even those of the non-financial sector can also seek the same permission.
Diverting from the aim of Aadhaar itself: Aadhaar was aimed to provide a unique identity to individuals but this widening of the ambit of Aadhaar will make it an instrument of financial matters.